Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The impact of academic support services on Division I student-athletes' college degree completion
(USC Thesis Other)
The impact of academic support services on Division I student-athletes' college degree completion
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
1
THE IMPACT OF ACADEMIC SUPPORT SERVICES ON DIVISION I STUDENT-
ATHLETES’ COLLEGE DEGREE COMPLETION
By
Dana S. Kuwahara
________________________________________________________________________
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 2018
Copyright 2018 Dana S. Kuwahara
2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
There are many people I would like to acknowledge and thank for their support
and influence during this dissertation and doctorate process. It has been a long road, and
without the constant support and encouragement from the following people, I am not
positive I would have made it to the end. I will begin by recognizing Moorpark High
School (MHS), where I worked full-time at the beginning of this process. Thank you to
the administration who allowed me to create a full-time teaching schedule that enabled
me to be on campus at USC for classes. I want to thank the MHS softball program,
particularly head coach Meaghan Stotts, for being flexible with my coaching hours while
also keeping me as her assistant varsity coach for 2 years. I want to thank my students
and athletes at MHS for their support and encouragement along the way. To my
colleagues, Zara Navarro, who also went through this program with me, Emily Piper, and
Nisha Parmar, thank you for pushing me, allowing me to learn from you, and being
positive influences in my life through the early days of this graduate program.
I would also like to recognize Santa Clara University, particularly the Athletic
Department and Drahmann undergraduate advisement center, for supporting me in my
quest to complete this doctorate degree while taking on a new position full-time in a
Division I Athletic Department. Completing this dissertation would not have been
possible without the support of great colleagues, mentors, student-athletes, and friends,
particularly Dr. Renee Baumgartner, Jeff Mitchell, Staci Gustafson, Kerry Keating, Jesse
Pruitt, Brandon Rosenthal, Kyle Eisenmann, Dan O’Brien, Gabe Ribas, Emily Burke,
Evan VanBecelaere, Casey Miller, Donna Bolio, Cody Johnson, Zoe Kranzler, David
Gentile, Kathryn Palmeiri, Laura Fujieda, Diana Morlang, Garrison Dyer, Dr. Katie
3
Heintz, Dr. Christina Rivera, Mattie Gullatt, and DJ Johnson. I want to say thank you for
sharing your love of intercollegiate athletics and higher education with me on a daily
basis and for understanding the time and effort needed to complete this research study.
I’d also like to recognize the student-athletes with whom I have worked and continue to
work at both UCLA and Santa Clara for continuing to inspire me in my professional
career working in Division I sports.
To the colleagues I have met throughout this program—particularly the
sensational six, Brian Guerrero, Sharon Chia Claros, Nancy Le, Yolanda Jauregui, and
Kaitlin Goodwillie—thank you for being on this journey with me from day one. I am
thankful to call you colleagues but more so to call you friends. To Brian Guerrero
specifically, without your constant support, encouragement, phone calls, emails, and
company at the Santa Monica Coffee Bean, I am not sure completing this degree would
have been possible. To my formal dissertation committee, particularly my chair Dr.
Tracy Tambascia, you are one incredible individual. Thank you for never giving up on
me and for pushing me through the tough times. I am forever grateful to have been placed
in your thematic dissertation group and cannot express my gratitude for everything you
have done for me. I’d also like to recognize Dr. Helena Seli for making such a profound
impact on me while being a student in her class and for agreeing to be a part of my
dissertation committee. Dr. Katie Heintz, thank you for being a part of my committee,
for welcoming me into the Santa Clara University community and for the many
contributions you have made in not only my life but also the lives of the students you
continue to teach and inspire.
4
I would like to thank the many practitioners who I had the great honor of meeting
throughout this program. Many of these individuals helped me find focus, inspiration,
and motivation along the way. I would like to thank Jennifer Craig, Jason Hale, Brian
Guerrero, Heidi Parragil, Sinar Lomeli, and Max King Cap for your helpful feedback as
we wrote the first two chapters of our dissertations. I also want to thank Nina Kang,
Damon Hines, and Jill Richardson for allowing me to learn from you throughout this
program. A special thank you needs to go out to Kenny Donaldson who had such a deep
influence on my life during a leadership shadow project. Kenny opened my eyes to the
world of academic services within DI athletics and ignited my current career path that
ultimately influenced the focus of this study. I know I have left people off this list, but to
everyone who made me laugh, offered support, and provided me with motivation to
complete this dissertation study, I cannot express enough gratitude.
Lastly, I want to thank my family, the Kuwahara and McCusker families, as well
as Pam and Mike Gentile, Karen and Tim Stewart, Danielle and Jeff Renzi, Heidi and
Arce Estremera, and Casey and Rene Castellanos. I want to especially recognize my son
Shane McCusker, whose life inspired me to obtain this degree and to whom I dedicate
this dissertation. He taught me a great deal about perseverance, control, and dedication,
and for that I am forever changed and forever grateful. I want to thank my parents, Gary
and Teri Kuwahara, and my brother Derek for always being overachievers and for
inspiring me to find my potential and encouraging me along the way. This degree is as
much yours as it is mine.
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ 2
LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................. 8
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ 9
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 10
Background of the Problem ........................................................................................ 11
Under Preparedness ...............................................................................................11
Academic Support Services for Student-Athletes ..................................................12
Professional Careers...............................................................................................13
Persistence to Complete .........................................................................................15
Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................ 16
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................... 17
Research Questions ..................................................................................................... 17
The Importance of the Study....................................................................................... 18
Limitations and Delimitations ..................................................................................... 19
Definitions................................................................................................................... 21
Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 22
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .................................................... 23
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................... 24
The College Completion Agenda................................................................................ 24
Government Interest in College Completion .........................................................26
Completion Agenda: Numbers and Rankings........................................................27
Understanding Student Populations ............................................................................ 29
Student-Athletes versus Traditional Students ........................................................30
Student-Athlete Graduation Rates .........................................................................31
College Requirements and Eligibility ......................................................................... 32
Athletic Participation Eligibility Requirements .....................................................36
Academic Progress Rate ........................................................................................37
Academic Support Services ........................................................................................ 38
The Academic Support Needs of Student-Athletes ...............................................39
Academic Clustering Phenomenon ........................................................................39
Problems within Academic Support ......................................................................40
Understanding the Student-Athlete Experience .......................................................... 41
Stereotypes and Discrimination .............................................................................41
Stereotypes Held by Faculty ..................................................................................42
Identity Development.................................................................................................. 44
Consequences of Holding a Dual Identity .............................................................45
Identity Development of Elite Male Student-Athletes ...........................................47
Misconceptions of Departure .................................................................................48
6
Factors Associated with Academic Failure............................................................49
Student Departure ....................................................................................................... 50
Theory of Departure ...............................................................................................50
Influence of Persistence and Adjustment on Student-Athlete College Departure .51
Impact of Social and Academic Integration ...........................................................52
Academic Services for Student-Athletes ...............................................................54
Student-Athlete Services ........................................................................................57
Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 58
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ......................................................................... 60
Main Research Question ............................................................................................. 60
Research Design.......................................................................................................... 61
Site Selection .............................................................................................................. 62
Department of Athletics .........................................................................................62
The Men’s Basketball Program .............................................................................63
Population and Sample ............................................................................................... 64
Student-Athlete Population ....................................................................................64
Academic Support Staff .........................................................................................65
Instrumentation ........................................................................................................... 65
Data Collection ........................................................................................................... 68
Data Analysis .............................................................................................................. 69
Validity ....................................................................................................................... 70
Role of Researcher ...................................................................................................... 70
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS ........................................................................................ 72
Findings....................................................................................................................... 73
Theme 1 .................................................................................................................74
Theme 2 .................................................................................................................76
Theme 3 .................................................................................................................84
Summary ..................................................................................................................... 87
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ................................................ 89
Summary of Findings .................................................................................................. 90
Athletic Academic Advisors Helped Bridged Student-Athlete Identities .............90
Multiple Academic Support Services Assisted in Degree Completion .................91
Formal Measurement of the Effectiveness of Academic Success Did Not Exist ..96
Discussion ................................................................................................................... 98
Special Admits .......................................................................................................99
Student-Athletes and Academic Services ............................................................100
Recommendation 1.……………………………………………………………..........100
Recommendation 2.……………………………………………………………..........101
Recommendation 3.……………………………………………………………..........102
Recommendation 4.……………………………………………………………..........103
7
Implications............................................................................................................... 104
Recommendations for Future Research .................................................................... 104
Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 105
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 106
APPENDIX A: EMAIL SOLICITATION TO FORMER STUDENT-ATHLETE ....... 118
APPENDIX B: ONLINE STUDENT-ATHLETE PARTICIANT SURVEY ................ 119
APPENDIX C: EMAIL SOLICITATION TO UNIVERISTY ACADEMIC STAFF ... 120
APPENDIX D: ONLINE STAFF PARTICIANT SURVEY ......................................... 121
APPENDIX E: STUDENT-ATHLETE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS ........................... 122
APPENDIX F: ACADEMIC SUPPORT STAFF INTERVIEW PROTOCOL ............. 125
APPENDIX G: INFORMATION SHEET ..................................................................... 127
8
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Degree Attainment Goals Per State to Reach 2020 College Completion Goal .. 28
Table 2. NCAA 2012 Division I Graduation Success Rate by Men’s Sports................... 32
Table 3. NCAA Eligibility Center Quick Reference Guide ............................................. 34
Table 4. NCAA Academic Eligibility: Annual Progress Toward Degree Requirements
For 4-Year Degree Program ............................................................................... 35
Table 5. SAU Academic Support Staff Participant Information ...................................... 73
Table 6. SAU Former Student-Athlete Information ......................................................... 73
9
ABSTRACT
The gap between NCAA Division I men’s basketball student-athletes and their
historically low graduation success rate is relatively unknown. With a small percentage
of this population leaving for professional careers, there is a need to understand why
men’s basketball has been among the two NCAA sports with the lowest graduation rates.
The purpose of this study was to identify ways in which Division I men’s basketball
student-athletes utilize academic support services in order to increase persistence to reach
degree completion. One university with above average graduation success rates for their
men’s basketball program was examined for this qualitative case study. Former Division
I men’s basketball student-athletes (N = 5) who reached graduation were interviewed. In
addition, academic support staff members (N = 5) who worked with the men’s basketball
population at some point in their career were also interviewed. Through a semi-structured
interview approach, findings provided insight into academic support services that
affected student-athlete persistence to reach graduation. Results showed that the small
private institution with a historically high graduation success rate for those who competed
on the NCAA Division I men’s basketball team was successful in meeting the needs of
student-athletes through three levels of academic advising, which included faculty
involvement in advisement and athletics advisors. Coaches’ support of academic success
also had a great impact on academic and graduation success as well as tutoring services
and student-athlete self-motivation. The study also indicated a need to understand
implications and resources at larger universities with exceptionally lower graduation
success rates.
10
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Recent trends in higher education have indicated low college completion rates of
students in the United States (College Board Advocacy and Policy Center, 2010). In
2012, the United States ranked 14
th
out of 36 developed countries in college completion
rates (College Board Advocacy and Policy Center, 2012). The need for skilled workers
with a college education is increasing, yet the number of college graduates in the U.S. has
declined (Humphreys, 2012). By 2018, the U.S. is projected to be short of approximately
three million college-educated workers (Carnevale, Smith, & Strohl, 2010). The declining
rates of college completion have raised significant concern in the U.S., and several
prominent organizations have identified the need for a better-educated country. Former
President Barack Obama made increasing the number of U.S. college degree holders a
priority when he created the American Graduation Initiative, which called for eight
million more college graduates by the year 2020; this includes degrees attained through
both 2- and 4-year institutions (U.S. Department of Education, 2011; The White House,
2009). In a similar objective, the College Board’s Commission set the goal of increasing
U.S. college completion rates to 55% by 2025 (College Board Advocacy and Policy
Center, 2012). Despite this increased focus on raising the U.S. higher education
graduation rate, a lack of attention has been placed on the many dimensions of the
American higher education system (i.e., college access, readiness, and student services),
which affects students’ abilities to complete a college degree (U.S. Department of
Education, 2011). Although graduation rates have garnered attention, the focus must be
more specific. In order to make significant increases to college completion rates,
consideration must be concentrated on specific aspects of higher education that create
11
roadblocks for the diverse U.S. student population, which ultimately affects persistence to
complete a college degree.
Background of the Problem
Intercollegiate athletics, particularly sports that compete within the National
Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) at the Division I level, are highly concerned
with fielding athletically competitive teams. Part of this concern is due to the prestige
that comes with competing and winning at the Division I level as well as the amount of
revenue that successful teams bring to universities. A significant issue in Division I
intercollegiate athletics centers on the academic progress of student-athletes in football
and men’s basketball (Griffin, 2008; National Collegiate Athletic Association [NCAA],
2012a). The degree completion rates for these two populations are largely affected by
three distinct factors: (a) academic under preparedness, (b) professional careers, and
(c) persistence to complete the degree (DeBrock, Hendricks, & Koenker, 1996; Hollis,
2001; Hood, Craig, & Ferguson, 1992; Johnson & Migliaccio, 2009).
Under Preparedness
Evidence suggests that, despite their athletic talents, many of these college
student-athletes are unable to succeed academically at highly rigorous academic
institutions (Hollis, 2001; Mangold, Bean, & Adams, 2003; Sack & Stravrowsky, 1998).
In recent years, major universities have increased their admissions standards while also
increasing the number of underprepared student-athletes they admit due to their
exceptional athletic ability (Hollis, 2001; Hood et al., 1992). Some of the top Division I
athletic institutions also rank among the top academically competitive universities and
colleges. However, the disparity in admission standards between highly athletically
12
recruited student-athletes and the general population can be significant. To highlight the
academic competitiveness of college admissions, institutions like the University of
California, Los Angeles (UCLA)—which, up until 2017, led the nation in NCAA
Championships—admitted 18.2% of applicants in 2014 (University of California, Los
Angeles, 2014); University of California, Berkeley (Cal) admitted 18.1% of applicants in
the same year (University of California, Berkeley, 2014); and Stanford University
admitted 5.7% of applicants in the year prior (Stanford University, 2014). Institutions
may choose to admit student-athletes who do not meet those academic standards as long
as they meet the NCAA initial eligibility requirements (students who do not meet the
NCAA initial eligibility requirements may be accepted into the school; however, they
cannot receive athletics aid and cannot participate in practice or competitions for their
first year of college) (NCAA, 2013a). The NCAA refers to these types of students as
special admits, which will be discussed later in this study in further detail, and does not
limit the number of student-athletes admitted under these circumstances (NCAA, 2013a).
Although the decision to grant special admits into a university is up to the discretion of
each institution, those student-athletes who are admitted under these circumstances
essentially begin college with an academic deficiency (when compared to the average
student admitted).
Academic Support Services for Student-Athletes
The NCAA (2013a) mandates that academic advising and support services be
available to all student-athletes. University athletic departments are permitted to provide
tutoring and counseling/advising services outside of the institution’s academic support
services (NCAA, 2013a). Athletic departments are also allowed to provide additional
13
career counseling and leadership development that may also benefit student-athlete
academic success (NCAA, 2013a). Athletic departments may not provide prospective
student-athletes with academic services to help them meet eligibility or university
admission requirements (NCAA, 2013a).
Professional Careers
Attrition rates for football and men’s basketball student-athletes are also affected
by professional athletic careers (Le Crom, Warren, Clark, Marolla, & Gerber, 2009).
Professional careers affect college completion rates due to the draft rules of the National
Basketball Association (NBA) and the National Football League (NFL). Student-athletes
who compete in Division I programs have the potential to be offered professional careers
before their college eligibility expires. For men’s basketball, the NBA requires that in
order for individuals to be eligible for the draft, they must be 1 year removed from high
school and at least 19 years of age (National Basketball Players’ Association, 2011); for
football, the NFL requires that for individuals to be eligible for the draft, they must be, at
minimum, three years removed from high school (National Football League Regional
Combines, n.d.). For many athletes with a goal of entering professional careers,
intercollegiate athletics offer the best preparation, as they are given the ability to compete
among the nation’s top athletes while awaiting an opportunity to play professionally.
Because professional draft rules do not require a college degree, and professional
eligibility status opens during a time period where individuals are still in the process of
earning college degrees, the top collegiate student-athletes have the potential to be
drafted into professional careers before their amateur statuses have exhausted and before
they complete college.
14
Participation in college athletics does not, however, guarantee a professional
career in sports. Though many student-athletes enter college with the dream of going
pro, only 1.6% of football players and 1.2% of men’s basketball players achieve
professional status (NCAA, 2012b). In order to increase graduation rates, there must be
an understanding of the likelihood of student-athletes entering into professional careers.
There is a need for institutions of higher education, particularly athletic departments, to
assess the value that each stakeholder places on degree completion in order to improve
student-athletes’ persistence to graduation.
The importance of college completion is particularly significant when considering
the length of professional athletic careers. Although professional careers offer a sense of
prestige and elitism, the lifestyle those careers produce is often short lived. The average
career span for NBA players ranges between 4.5-4.8 years (Lopez, 2010; RAM Financial
Group, n.d.) and the average career span for NFL players is 3.5 years (RAM Financial
Group, n.d.). The average annual NBA salary is $5.15 million (Aschburner, 2011; Burke,
2012) and the average annual NFL salary is $1.9 million (Bloomberg Business, 2011;
Burke, 2012). While incomes are generally high during the time of employment, because
of the lack of longevity in a career, many of these individuals find themselves in serious
financial trouble once their professional careers have ended. In 2009, Sports Illustrated
(as cited in Abrams, 2009) published a release stating that 78% of former NFL players
and 60% of former NBA players faced bankruptcy only 2 years after leaving their
professional athletic careers. For professional athletes without a degree, college
education is not something they can fall back on after their athletic careers have ended.
In 2009, only 21% of NBA players and 50% of NFL players had completed
15
undergraduate degrees (Abrams, 2009). The higher percentage of NFL college
completion rates is due in part to the professional declaration draft rules (3 years between
high school and professional draft), which make it more likely for student-athletes to stay
in college to finish their degree. Additionally, the NFL has established management
programs with universities that promote degree completion while also offering education
reimbursement of up to $15,000 for professional athletes who wish to complete college
degrees (Abrams, 2009). Despite these special programs, degree attainment rates for
former NFL players are still low.
Persistence to Complete
Although university mission statements provide general messages that promote
degree attainment, these institutions may be placing a higher value on athletic, rather than
academic, success (Hollis, 2001; Lang, Dunham, & Alpert, 1988; Parsons, 2013). In
order to have successful athletic programs, student-athletes must dedicate a substantial
amount of time to their sport. The time constraints imposed on any student have been
shown to negatively affect academic persistence (Mangold, Bean, & Adams, 2003;
Pascarella & Terenzini, 1983). Participation in sports creates time limitations, but it also
promotes what is known as social integration. According to departure theory, social
integration occurs when an individual feels inclusive to an environment, which allows
him/her to build a sense of camaraderie among others (Miller & Kerr, 2002). While in
athletics, this sense of camaraderie has the power to increase persistence to stay in
school; however, as the individual desires to remain a part of the team, it also threatens
academic persistence as the social environment becomes more valued than academics
(Mangold, Bean, & Adams, 2003; Tinto, 1997). Unfortunately, athletic participation
16
often creates an environment wherein social integration outweighs academic integration,
potentially limiting academic persistence (Mangold, Bean, & Adams. 2003; Pascarella &
Terenzini, 1983).
Statement of the Problem
The NCAA’s college graduation data show that student-athletes who compete at
the Division I level for football and men’s basketball have the lowest rates of college
completion. The NCAA’s annual Graduation Success Rate (GSR) shows that Division I
football and men’s basketball college completion levels have remained below all other
sports when it comes to graduating their student-athletes (DeBrock et al., 1996; Hood et
al., 1992; NCAA, 2012c). Despite the fact that in 2012, on average, 81% of all Division I
student-athletes reached degree completion, football and basketball players struggled to
achieve the 70
th
percentile range (NCAA, 2013b). The GSR data for individual sports
indicated that the average Division I football student-athlete graduation rate was 70% and
the average Division I men’s basketball student-athlete graduation rate was 74% (NCAA,
2013b). This data demonstrates that of the student-athletes who entered college in 2006,
more than 25% of them departed from college without completing a degree. With small
numbers of these individuals leaving for professional careers, there is a lack of
understanding as to why these student-athletes are not graduating. Limited research has
examined why these student populations have struggled to reach higher graduation rates
and has provided some knowledge about student-athlete lived experiences, but further
qualitative research is needed in order to understand the root of these low success rates.
17
Purpose of the Study
This study sought to understand how academic support services affected the
college degree completion of student-athletes who competed in the top revenue-
generating sports in order to increase the student-athlete college completion rates for
Division I football and men’s basketball. This research utilized a qualitative case study
approach and specifically focused on investigating one of the two sports with historically
low graduation rates. This qualitative research study centered its data collection at one
institution and studied the impact of academic support services on its Division I men’s
basketball program with the goal of understanding the factors that influence student-
athletes’ persistence to reach graduation.
Student-athlete attrition was examined through the lens of persistence and
departure theory. Departure theory stresses the importance of an individual’s ability to
integrate and adapt to an environment in order to be given the greatest chance of
succeeding (Tinto, 1988). This study utilized Tinto’s (1988) theory of student departure
to understand how student-athlete persistence was influenced by their college experience.
This problem was also studied through the lens of student identity development theory,
which examined the influence of carrying a dual identity specifically on academic
success (Killeya-Jones, 2005).
Research Questions
The research questions that guided the study were:
18
1. What was the role of academic support services in student-athlete degree
completion?
a. How did academic support help student-athletes bridge the scholar and
athlete identities?
b. How were the academic support services designed to influence
progress towards degree completion?
c. What were the experiences of student-athletes who use academic
support services to assist in their degree completion?
d. How did the academic support staff measure the effectiveness of
services for student-athletes and its impact on degree completion?
This qualitative study focused on a men’s basketball program at a 4-year university that
competes at the NCAA Division I level.
The Importance of the Study
This study provided rich data on effective methods of delivering academic
support practices in supporting student-athletes’ graduation. The findings from this study
provide a valuable direction for universities seeking to increase graduation rates for this
population. The data found through the research revealed the experiences of actual
Division I basketball student-athletes who completed undergraduate degrees. The
findings also provide academic support staff with promising practices that may increase
academic persistence and degree completion of their student-athletes, particularly those
who compete on high profile and high revenue-generating teams.
19
Limitations and Delimitations
As in any research analysis, this study comes with limitations. The qualitative
case study approach utilized in this study limited the sample to one institution. The
experiences of the student-athletes and staff will vary at other universities. Because the
targeted population is considered high profile, the university staff and student-athletes
might have felt unable to speak freely about their experiences in fear of revealing
violations or in fear of providing information that could have been misunderstood. Since
qualitative studies are focused on experiences, data were collected primarily through
interviews. It is possible that limitations created by interviews occurred due to the
structure of the interview protocol, along with the researcher’s delivery and behavior.
The participants’ willingness to share data with the researcher might also have varied due
to their comfort with the researcher. The researcher’s behavior had the potential to affect
the participants’ willingness to share rich data due to body language, facial expressions,
and tone throughout the interview. It was important for the researcher to stay as neutral
as possible when interviewing each participant. Also, this study utilized the semi-
structured interview protocol, with set questions from which the researcher could not
deviate. However, the semi-structured construct of the interview did provide the
researcher with the opportunity for unscripted dialogue that could have varied from one
interview to another. This had the potential to alter the progression and interaction
between the researcher and the various respondents, and the interpretation of the data
could therefore vary. In addition, it was important that the researcher did not disclose
information that detailed her own personal experience or opinion that might have affected
the information the participant choose to disclose. This could have created limitations
20
that affected the participants’ level of trust and comfort in sharing rich information with
the researcher due to the fact that the researcher did not offer any opinion about what was
being shared (Maxwell, 2013).
In regard to document analysis, the data provided will not always offer the
specific information needed for qualitative purposes (Merriam, 2009). Similar to the
limitations discussed regarding the participant pool, since the information from this study
was collected from one institution, the document data will vary significantly from other
institutions.
This study also has delimitations. Because this study sought to understand which
academic support services affected persistence toward degree completion, the
experiences of students who did not complete degrees were not included. Instead, only
students who graduated with college degrees were interviewed because the purpose was
to understand the experience of student-athletes who completed a college degree.
Second, due to the historically low graduation data, only student-athletes who competed
in men’s basketball at the Division I level were included in this study.
Lastly, as the researcher for this study, it was important that I not let my own
personal experiences as a former collegiate student-athlete impact my findings. It was
critical that I approach this study relatively free of opinions based on my own experiences
as a former collegiate student-athlete and also as a professional working within this field.
Because of my own personal and professional experiences with this particular topic, it
was imperative for me to remain I remained objective during the interview and data
analysis process so that I did not manipulate the findings to prove my own personal
beliefs.
21
Definitions
The following list provides commonly used terms that were used throughout this
research study. The definitions are provided to offer clarity and understanding.
Student-Athlete: An individual who attends an educational institution and also
competes in an athletic program (Eitle & Eitle, 2002; Hoberman, 2000;
Johnson & Migliaccio, 2009).
Underprepared Student-Athlete: The NCAA calls these student-athletes
special admits¸ individuals who may not be admissible under published grade
and standardized test scores following the institution’s general admission
requirements (NCAA, 2013a).
At-Risk: “At-risk student athletes are those on academic probation or in
jeopardy of not meeting NCAA academic standards” (Carodine, Almond, &
Gratto, 2001, p. 29).
Graduation Success Rate (GSR): The percentage of student-athletes who
reach graduation. Prescribed by the U.S. Department of Education, the GSR
is based on cohorts of 6 years (NCAA, n.d.b).
Academic Progress Rate (APR): The NCAA’s metric system that holds
institutions accountable, term-by-term, for the academic progress and
retention of each student-athlete (NCAA, n.d.a).
National Collegiate Athletic Association: The organization overseeing
intercollegiate athletic programs with the purpose of governing competition in
a manner that demonstrates fair, safe, equitable, and sportsmanlike conduct
22
while also integrating intercollegiate athletics into the educational experience
of higher education (NCAA, n.d.c).
Persistence towards Degree: The ability to persevere through challenges in
order to reach college completion.
Division I Athletics: The division of the NCAA that includes institutions that
generally manage the largest athletic budgets and offer the most significant
amount of scholarships (NCAA, n.d.d).
Academic Support Services: Academic support programs and personnel
provided to student-athletes through a university athletic department.
NCAA Compliance and Eligibility: The NCAA rules and regulations with
which student-athletes must comply in order to remain eligible to compete in
sport.
Conclusion
This study intended to analyze academic support services specifically in place for
NCAA Division I men’s basketball student-athletes. The examination intended to close
the gap on the academic retention problems faced by this particular population of student-
athletes. The intent of the study was to identify academic support services that affected
student persistence to reach college completion. The findings sought to support the goals
of the College Completion Initiative by increasing the number of U.S. college degrees.
The following chapter will present a review of literature to support the relevance of this
study.
23
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The purpose of this study was to explore the academic support structures that
affected Division I men’s basketball student-athletes’ persistence towards degree
completion. As the United States aimed to boost college degree attainment rates, the
objective of this study was to examine a student population that has historically produced
low rates of college degree achievement. Under the governance of the NCAA, Division I
athletic programs are required to monitor the academic progress of each student-athlete in
order to certify their eligibility status, allowing them to participate in athletically-related
activities (NCAA, 2013c). Because retention for the two most high-profile NCAA sports,
football and men’s basketball, has historically been lower than retention for athletes
competing in other sports (NCAA, 2012a), it was important to understand factors that
prevented successful degree attainment as well as to examine the academic support
structures that were in place to help these students reach graduation.
In this chapter, I address the literature and research that has been conducted
previously on Division I athletics with an emphasis on the degree completion of football
and men’s basketball student-athletes. The first section of this review discusses the
current college completion agenda and objectives and goals in boosting degree attainment
in the U.S. Also in this section, the student-athlete population is introduced and current
student-athlete degree completion rates are discussed. The second section presents the
roles of the NCAA and rules and regulations as they pertained to Division I student-
athlete eligibility and college completion. Section three of the chapter investigates the
history of student-athlete academic success and discusses fraudulent practices that have
garnered significant media attention. Section four examines the student-athlete
24
experience in relation to campus climate, and section five discusses the identity
development of student-athletes and the implications of holding a dual identity. Finally,
the last part of the chapter explores student departure theories as they relate to student-
athlete persistence and concludes by investigating the growth in academic support
services by university athletic departments.
Purpose of the Study
As discussed in chapter one, the purpose of this study was to identify academic
support factors that affected student-athlete degree completion for those who participated
in a Division I men’s basketball program. In order to understand the academic
expectations and the student-athlete experience, the study examined specific NCAA
guidelines and academic programs, along with university services, and utilized student
development theories that contributed to the retention and attrition rates of this student
group. As this population is at high risk of not graduating, attention was brought to how
academic support services could best serve this population in addressing the issues it
faces. Therefore, this study aimed to understand how academic support services for
student-athletes at Division I institutions have addressed the needs of high profile teams,
specifically men’s basketball student-athletes, in reaching college completion.
The College Completion Agenda
In 2008, the College Board’s Commission on Access, Admissions, and Success in
Higher Education published a report titled Coming to Our Senses: Education and the
American Future. This report noted recent trends in higher education, including
significant drops in U.S. college degree attainment. The report also claimed that the
proportion of adults with postsecondary credentials in the U.S. was not keeping pace with
25
growth in other industrialized nations (College Board Advocacy and Policy Center,
2010). According to Carnevale et al. (2010), by 2018, the U.S. is projected to be short of
approximately three million college-educated workers. The shortage is based upon
workforce projections and the demand for skilled workers who have obtained a college
degree (Humphreys, 2012).
As defined in the commission’s report, the goal of U.S. college completion for
adults 25 to 34 years of age needs to increase to 55% by the year 2025. In 2011, 43.1%
of Americans in this same age range held a 2- or 4-year college degree (College Board
Advocacy and Policy Center, 2012). The goal of this initiative was isolated to
individuals who held an associate degree or higher (College Board Advocacy and Policy
Center, 2010). While not federally mandated, the college completion agenda is a national
agenda; many prominent organizations and foundations have come together, along with
the U.S. Department of Education (DOE), to raise awareness of the need for a better-
educated population and to find ways to increase college completion (College Board
Advocacy and Policy Center, 2012).
Since the commission first convened in 2008, the educational landscape has
changed dramatically. Changes came as a direct result of external factors impacting the
original goal of the commission and underlying recommendations. When the nation
began feeling the effects of the 2008 recession, budgets for federal and state governments
declined (College Board Advocacy and Policy Center, 2010). The impact of these
external factors may have played a role in college completion by affecting college
affordability, creating financial barriers for prospective or current students with desires to
participate in higher education.
26
Government Interest in College Completion
President Obama made it a priority to place a great deal of importance upon
college degree completion in the U.S. By the year 2020, he set a goal that the U.S.
should once again have the highest percentage of college graduates in the world (U.S.
Department of Education, 2011). Obama outlined this objective in his very first State of
the Union address: “America will once again have the highest proportion of college
graduates” (as cited in The White House, 2009, para. 52). The president also noted that,
“In a global economy where the most valuable skill you can sell is your knowledge, a
good education is no longer just a pathway to opportunity –it is a prerequisite” and that
“every American will need to get more than a high school diploma” (as cited in
Humphreys, 2012, para. 2). To support this presidential objective, the DOE described
certain milestones the U.S. needed to achieve in order to meet the college completion
goal. Specifically, U.S. college graduation rates for both 2- and 4-year institutions must
increase by 50% nationwide, which meant that nearly eight million college students
between the age of 25-34 would need to earn associate and bachelor’s degrees by the year
2020 (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). Despite the continued focus on nationwide
graduation rates, the DOE recognized that other dimensions of the U.S. higher education
system needed to change (e.g., increase college access, readiness, and quality) in order to
achieve the presidential college completion goal (U.S. Department of Education, 2011).
The participation and contributions of the state also play a substantial role in
strengthening the college completion agenda. It was projected that jobs requiring at least
an associate degree or higher would double in the upcoming years (The White House,
2009). In satisfying this need, President Obama placed a specific focus on the impact and
27
effectiveness of the community college system, for which the states were individually
accountable. For Americans to be able to compete with workers from other nations, the
former president asked for every American to devote at least 1 year to career training or
higher education in order to reach the goal of adding an additional five million
community college graduates by the year 2020 (The White House, 2009). Certain states
were charged with making more changes than others. Table 1 shows the graduation total
that each state needs to meet in order to fulfill the 2020 goal. To date, 19 states have set
degree attainment goals (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). Both national and state
goals may positively influence the long-term economic strength of the U.S.
Completion Agenda: Numbers and Rankings
In 2010, the U.S. produced 257,772 more degrees than in 2008 (College Board
Advocay and Policy Center, 2012). Although data demonstrated improvement in degree
attainment, college graduation rates were increasing slowly, if at all. For instance, the
national 3-year graduation rate for students in 2-year colleges was 29.9% in 2010, up just
slightly from the previous year (College Board Advocacy and Policy Center, 2012). In
contrast, the average national 6-year graduation rate for students seeking bachelor’s
degrees in 4-year institutions was 58.8% in 2010, just half a percent higher than the
previous year (College Board Advocacy and Policy Center, 2012).
28
Table 1
Degree Attainment Goals Per State to Reach 2020 College Completion Goal
Note. Adapted from “U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS),
Education Attainment ages 25-34. Three-Year Average Estimates for 2007-2009; and
U.S. Census Bureau: 2020 Population Projections.”
29
Although these percentages may not show significant growth, other reports on
college completion provided a more positive story that was not commonly known. First,
degree attainment rates may be higher based on advancements in student tracking,
particularly when examining transfer students who started at one campus and transferred
to/completed at another. Secondly, there was an optimistic trend in the number of
associate degrees awarded annually. From 2010 to 2011, the number of associate’s
degrees awarded in the U.S. was approximately 100,000 (College Board Advocacy and
Policy Center, 2012).
Even though metrics represented earlier focus on 2- and 4-year U.S. degree
attainment, one primary factor influencing the national agenda on American college
completion, as evident in Obama’s words noted previously, was global competition. Past
international rankings on degree attainment showed the US placing 12
th
in 2008 and 16th
in 2009 (College Board Advocacy and Policy Center, 2012). The 2012 international
rankings showed a slight improvement in terms of the percentage of individuals between
the ages of 25 to 34 who obtained an associate’s degree or higher. Out of 36 developing
countries, the U.S. moved into 14
th
place with an overall degree completion rate of
42.3%. When isolating the attainment of bachelor’s degrees and higher for this age group
noted above, the U.S. ranked 11
th
(College Board Advocacy and Policy Center, 2012).
Understanding Student Populations
Even as college completion agendas looked to increase the overall number of
degrees attained by students in the U.S., there were specific populations of students that
deserved attention. A traditional student is generally defined as one
30
who enrolls in college immediately after graduation from high school, pursues
college studies on a continuous full-time basis at least for in the fall and spring
semesters [or fall, winter, and spring quarters], and completes a bachelor’s degree
program in four or five years at the age of 22 or 23. (Center for Institutional
Effectiveness, 2014, p. 2)
Traditional students may be employed part-time and they consider their college career to
be their main obligation (Center for Institutional Effectiveness, 2014). Within this
traditional scope are subpopulations of students with independent concerns that influence
their ability to complete college degrees. Intercollegiate student-athletes, by definition,
are categorized as traditional students; however, the athletic and academic commitments
required of their time set them apart from their non-athletic peers.
Student-Athletes versus Traditional Students
Student-athletes are generally identified as traditional; they typically enroll in
college straight from high school, are required by the NCAA to take a full-time academic
course load, and must meet benchmarks that show continuous progression towards
completing their degree within 4-5 years (NCAA, 2013c). The definition of a traditional
student includes the capacity for part-time employment of 20 hours per week (Center for
Institutional Effectiveness, 2014). The NCAA strictly limits the amount of countable
hours as related to athletic activities in which student-athletes can participate (during
season)—which includes required practices, weight trainings, meetings with coaches for
athletically related matters, and film or video reviews—to 20 hours per week
(Washington State University, n.d.). Although one can make the argument that student-
athletes are similar to traditional students, as the countable athletically related activities
constitute the same amount of hours as a part-time job, the NCAA allows student-athletes
to participate in activities such as training table, physical rehabilitation, athletic
31
department study halls or tutoring, travel to and from practices and competitions, medical
examinations, fundraising activities, recruiting activities, media related activities, and
voluntary general individual workouts that are not supervised by coaching staff members
that do not count against the 20-hour weekly limitations (Washington State University,
n.d.). Although the description of a typical student-athlete may appear similar to the
general student population, to call them traditional when both athletics and academics
inflict arduous demands is problematic when looking at factors that influence their
college experience and ultimately have an effect on graduation rates.
Student-Athlete Graduation Rates
In comparison to their non-athletic/traditional peers, student-athletes have less
time to be immersed in additional academic involvement, i.e. study groups with non-
athletic peers, office hour visits, etc., due to time limitations (Lang et al., 1988). In 2013,
despite the amount of time required of athletic and academic participation, 81% of the
collective student-athlete population reached degree completion (NCAA, 2013b);
however, when disaggregated by gender and sport, the disparities show historical
problems for certain student-athlete populations. According to the NCAA (2013b), 88%
of female student-athletes graduated from college, whereas their male counterparts
graduated at a rate of 75%. While male student-athletes were slightly behind their female
counterparts in graduation success, according to the NCAA (2012a) GSR, the male
student-athlete graduation success was at its all-time highest. In 2012, the graduation
rates for Division I men’s basketball rose six points and football rose one point from the
previous year (Christianson, 2012). Table 2 shows the 2012 male student-athlete
graduation rates of each Division I men’s sports.
32
Table 2
NCAA 2012 Division I Graduation Success Rate by Men’s Sports
Men’s Sport 2012 Graduation Success Rate
Gymnastics 88.9%
Skiing 88.5%
Tennis 86%
Lacrosse 85.5%
Swimming 83.3%
Ice Hockey 83%
Golf 82%
Soccer 79.9%
Volleyball 78.5%
Baseball 75%
Basketball 74.1%
Football (FBS) 70%
Football (FCS) 68.5%
Note. Adapted from “Trade-off in NCAA grad rates,” by A. Grasgreen, 2012, Inside
Higher Ed (http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/26/ncaa-athlete-graduation-rates-
football-and-mens-basketball-down-over-all). Copyright 2012 by the author.
What the data illustrated, however, is that sports like football and basketball,
which garner the most significant amounts of media attention, are graduating fewer of
their student-athletes. Although the NCAA has celebrated the rise in graduation rates of
these two particular sports’ student-athletes, football and basketball are still at the bottom
of graduation completion rates among all Division I teams and have historically been
bottom finishers. The academic success of Division I football and men’s basketball has
acquired significant amounts of attention due to the history of low graduation rates.
College Requirements and Eligibility
Colleges and universities have set enrollment standards for students, but the
NCAA allows for the special admission of student-athletes who do not meet institutional
33
admissions requirements. The NCAA defines these student-athletes as special admits,
and states in the eligibility handbook under Bylaw 14.1.6.1.1:
a student-athlete may be admitted under a special exception to the institution’s
normal entrance requirements if the discretionary authority of the president or
chancellor (or designated admissions officer or committee) to grant such
exceptions is set forth in an official document published by the university (e.g.,
official catalog) that describes the institution’s admissions requirements. (NCAA,
2013a, p. 149)
Special admits can be admitted into universities under Bylaw 14.1.6.1.1. as long as the
student-athletes can pass the initial eligibility requirements of the NCAA Eligibility
Center (formerly known as the NCAA Clearinghouse). Upon enrolling in any 4-year
NCAA affiliated institution, all student-athletes must meet initial eligibility requirements
that assess the completion of high school courses and academic standings. Table 3 shows
the Division I initial-eligibility requirements first year student-athletes must meet upon
entering college and Table 4 shows the GPA requirements.
Once admitted, regardless of enrollment as a special admit or, not all student-
athletes are required to maintain their academic eligibility status if they want to remain
authorized to compete. This means that all student-athletes must be as academically
successful as their general population counterpart despite admissions standards. While it
is essentially up to the university to approve special admits, a student-athlete such as the
one described previously can potentially be admitted into a university where they will be
required to take academic courses designed for students who meet the admission
standards. If a student-athlete is admitted under these special circumstances, then he/she
essentially begins his/her collegiate career academically behind.
34
Table 3
NCAA Eligibility Center Quick Reference Guide
Division I Initial-Eligibility Requirements
Core Courses (16 Core Courses)
4 years of English
3 years of mathematics (Algebra I or higher)
2 years of natural/physical science (1 year of lab if offered by high school)
1 year of additional English, mathematics or natural/physical science
2 years of social science
4 years of additional courses (from any area above, foreign language or
comparative religion/philosophy)
Note. As of August 1, 2016, NCAA Division I will require 10 core courses to be
completed prior to the seventh semester (seven of the ten must be a combination of
English, math or natural or physical science that meet the distribution requirements).
These 10 courses become “locked in” at the start of the seventh semester and cannot be
retaken for grade improvement. Beginning August 1, 2016, it will be possible for a
Division I college-bound student-athletes to still receive athletic aid and the ability to
practice with the team if he or she fails to meet the 10 course requirement, but would
not be able to compete.
Test Scores
The SAT score used for NCAA purposes includes only the critical reading and
math sections. The writing section is not used.
The ACT score used for NCAA purposes is a sum of the following four
sections: English, mathematics, reading and science.
Division I uses a sliding scale to match test scores and core grade-point averages
(GPAs).
Grade-Point Average
Only courses that appear in the student’s high school List of NCAA Courses on the
NCAA Eligibility Center’s website will be used in the calculation of the core GPA
Students enrolling full time before August 1, 2016, should use Sliding Scale A to
determine eligibility to receive athletic aid, practice and completion during the first year
GPA required to receive athletic aid and practice on or after August 1, 2016, is
2.000-2.299 (corresponding test-score requirements are listed on Sliding Scale
B)
GPA requirements to be eligible for competition on or after August 1, 2016, is
2.300 (corresponding test-score requirements are listed on Sliding Scale B)
Core GPA requirement is a minimum 2.000
Remember, NCAA GPA is calculated using NCAA core courses only
Note. Adapted from “Divisions I and II Initial-Eligibility Requirements,” by the National Collegiate
Athletics Association Eligibility Center, n.d. (http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/
Quick_Reference_Sheet.pdf). Copyright 2018 by the author.
35
Table 4
NCAA Academic Eligibility: Annual Progress Toward Degree Requirements For 4-Year
Degree Program
Academic
Year Credit Hour Requirements Term-by-Term Credit Hour Requirements
Year 1 Certified as a NCAA final academic
qualifier
Enroll Full-Time (12-Credit Hours)
Certified at end of the academic year:
Complete 18-semester/27-quarter
hours during regular academic year
(not including summer)
Pass at least 6 hours
Football Only 9-semester/8-quarter hours of
academic credit and earn the APR
“eligibility point” during fall term.
Baseball Only-Must be eligible at the
beginning of Fall term- or will not be
eligible for the remainder of academic year.
Year 2 Prior to the start of year 2, student-
athletes must: Complete 24-
semester/36-quarter hours of degree
credit
Enroll Full-Time (12-Credit Hours)
Certified at end of the academic year:
Complete 18-semester/27-quarter
hours during regular academic year
(not including summer)
1.80 Cumulative GPA
Pass at least 6 hours
Football Only 9-semester/8-quarter hours of
academic credit and earn the APR
“eligibility point” during fall term.
Baseball Only-Must be eligible at the
beginning of Fall term- or will not be
eligible for the remainder of academic year.
Year 3 Complete 40% of designated degree
program
Enroll Full-Time (12 hours)
Certified at end of the academic year:
Complete 18-semester/27-quarter
hours during regular academic year
(not including summer)
1.90 Cumulative GPA
Pass at least 6 hours
Football Only 9-semester/8-quarter hours of
academic credit and earn the APR
“eligibility point” during fall term.
Baseball Only-Must be eligible at the
beginning of Fall term- or will not be
eligible for the remainder of academic year.
Year 4 Complete 60% of designated degree
program
Enroll Full-Time (12 hours)
Certified at end of the academic year:
Complete 18-semester/27-quarter
hours during regular academic year
(not including summer)
2.00 Cumulative G.P.A.
Pass at least 6 hours
Football Only 9-semester/8-quarter hours of
academic credit and earn the APR
“eligibility point” during fall term.
Baseball Only-Must be eligible at the
beginning of Fall term- or will not be
eligible for the remainder of academic year.
Year 5 Complete 80% of designated degree
program
Enroll Full-Time (12 hours)
Certified at end of the academic year:
Complete 18-semester/27-quarter
hours during regular academic year
(not including summer)
2.00 Cumulative GPA
Pass at least 6 hours
Football Only 9-semester/8-quarter hours of
academic credit and earn the APR
“eligibility point” during fall term.
Baseball Only-Must be eligible at the
beginning of Fall term- or will not be
eligible for the remainder of academic year
Note. Adapted from “Remaining Eligible,” by the National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2013c
(http://www.ncaastudent.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/Eligibility/Remaining+Eligible). Copyright
2013 by the author.
36
Athletic Participation Eligibility Requirements
As a part of its commitment to impact student-athlete academic achievement, the
NCAA developed eligibility requirements to keep all student-athletes able to athletically
compete and on track to graduate. Table 4 displays the academic requirements, per year,
that student-athletes must meet in order to remain eligible for athletic participation.
Should student-athletes fail to meet the set requirements and show continuous
progression toward degree completion, then they risk not only their eligibility to compete,
but also losing privileges available to their team (Carodine et al., 2001).
Student-athletes must continue to meet the benchmarks set by the NCAA’s
eligibility and compliance guidelines (NCAA, 2013c). The NCAA (2013c) often refers
to these guidelines as continuing eligibility or progress-toward-degree standards with the
purpose of assisting student-athletes to stay on track with college completion. University
academic staff are responsible for monitoring each student-athlete’s progress-toward-
degree status and must certify the academic eligibility of each student-athlete at the end
of each quarter or semester in order for student-athletes to be declared eligible to compete
(NCAA, 2013c). Should student-athletes be declared ineligible, they lose athletic
participation privileges and must progress through the reinstatement process to gain back
the ability to participate in intercollegiate athletics.
In circumstances where a student-athlete needed to restore her or his eligibility,
the university would conduct an investigation and gather facts to begin the reinstatement
process (NCAA, 2013d). A reinstatement request must be submitted by the university to
the NCAA’s national office staff where a review of each independent case is conducted
37
(NCAA, 2013d). The NCAA has the ability to reinstate, reinstate with conditions, or
deny student-athlete eligibility (NCAA, 2013d). If institutions wish to contest the
NCAA’s decision, they may appeal to the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement.
The committee, which is composed of representatives from various NCAA institutions,
can decrease or eliminate the original decision; however, they cannot increase the
conditions that have already been implemented (NCAA, 2013d).
Academic Progress Rate
To encourage, motivate, and hold student-athletes accountable for their individual
academic success, the NCAA also developed the Academic Progress Rate (APR). The
APR is a metric system used to calculate each student-athlete’s academic success (i.e.
GPA, countable degree units) and factors him/her into the team’s overall average
(Goddard, 2012; NCAA, 2012b). According the NCAA,
Each student-athlete receiving athletically related financial aid [will] earn one
retention point [per semester/quarter] for staying in school and one eligibility
point for being academically eligible. A team’s total points are divided by points
possible and then multiplied by one thousand to equal the team’s APR score.
(NCAA, 2012a, p. 1)
Teams are required to maintain an APR average of 930 or higher over a period of 4 years
in order to avoid sanctions that ultimately affect the entire team (NCAA, 2012a). The
APR was created not only to hold student-athletes accountable for their grades, but more
specifically to create accountability among Division I institutions (NCAA, 2012a). When
student-athletes fail to meet the requirements of their academic commitments and are
certified as ineligible, they lose the eligibility point, which affects their team’s overall
APR. Should a student-athlete leave the university prior to reaching graduation or fail to
enroll as a full-time student when full-time credit hours are required, he/she risks losing
38
the APR retention points that factor into the team’s overall average. This situation places
pressure on the institution to retain student-athletes and help them progress toward
graduation. If the APR falls below the minimum 930, teams are sanctioned to various
degrees depending on the severity of the score, which ultimately affects the team’s ability
to compete (NCAA, 2012a).
Academic Support Services
Research has shown that academic support services on college campuses have a
positive influence on student retention and graduation rates (Lotkowski, Robbins, &
Noeth, 2004; Wetzel, O’Toole, & Peterson, 1999). The ACT Policy Report (Lotkowski et
al., 2004) found that academic support services that focused on teaching process oriented
strategies (i.e., note taking, learning strategies, questioning) positively affected student
retention. Academic services that supplemented rigorous courses, particularly those
taught to first and second year students, were more beneficial than programs that just
targeted high-risk students (Lotkowski et al., 2004; Ramirez, 1997). Mentors and tutors
who could facilitate study sessions by guiding student learning that clarified course
material, rather than re-lecturing, and modeled correct processes expected of the course,
provided struggling students with impactful academic support (Lotkowski et al., 2004).
Academic advising also affected college retention (Mangold, Bean, Adams,
Schwab, & Lynch, 2003). Structured academic advising helped students plan out courses
that kept them on a path for academic success (Lotkowski et al., 2004). Advising
programs that also included block registration also shown to affect retention. Mangold,
Bean, Adams et al. (2003) suggested that block registration gives students the opportunity
to effectively plan and take the desired courses to keep them on track academically.
39
The Academic Support Needs of Student-Athletes
In the 1960s and 1970s, student-athlete college graduation rates were at the
bottom of many collegiate institutions’ priorities (Hollis, 2001). Instead of being
concerned with graduation success, some of these institutions were focused solely on
keeping student-athletes eligible to compete (Hollis, 2001). In order to support these
student-athletes in meeting eligibility standards, unethical practices took place (Hollis,
2001). The pressure and desire to win resulted in FBI investigations that found
institutions guilty of producing fraudulent transcripts along with other unethical practices,
including the tampering of academic records and academically clustering student-athletes
into easy courses with cooperative professors who would agree to give them passing
grades (Hollis, 2001).
Academic Clustering Phenomenon
Previous research investigated a phenomenon that has been linked to
intercollegiate student-athletes known as academic clustering (Phillips, 2009). Academic
clustering was defined as occurring “when more than 25% of a team shares one academic
major” (Fountain & Finley, 2009, p. 1). The practice of clustering student-athletes was
questioned by academic administrators and critics of student-athlete education
(Schnieder, Ross, & Fisher, 2010). Reports of high percentages of student-athletes
enrolled in less demanding majors sparked debate over whether student-athletes were
being pressured into making specific academic choices in order to adhere to the demands
of athletic participation (Hollis, 2001; Lang et al., 1988; Parsons, 2013). Although
clustering alleviated the academic pressure on many of these student-athletes by
simplifying their academic course curriculum, it also deprived them of an education
40
needed for life after sports. Student-athletes who went through college where their
schedules strictly catered to alleviating conflicts with their athletic schedule and demands
tended to exhaust their eligibility before finishing a degree (Parsons, 2013).
Problems within Academic Support
Recent academic scandals that have made headlines posed questions as to whether
universities valued winning more than student-athlete academic achievement. The desire
to keep the best student-athletes eligible for competitions led to problems that have
destroyed the reputations of some university and athletic programs. For example, the
University of North Carolina faced a scandal that exposed fraudulent practices of a
department administrator and chair who accepted payment to teach a course in order to
help student-athletes maintain eligible academic standings. Well known schools like
Florida State University, Purdue University, and the University of Kansas have all dealt
with academic cases that have brought into question whether having a winning program
is a higher priority than teaching student-athletes the value of self-sufficiency,
responsibility, and accountability. The scandal at Florida State University involved 23
student-athletes who were given materials to help them cheat on online exams by
members of the academic staff (Powers, 2007). Purdue University and the University of
Kansas both dealt with cases that involved former coaching staff members giving
student-athletes papers and supplying them with exam answers (Powers, 2007). These
types of unethical practices have quickly led the nation to question not only the
legitimacy of student-athlete academic achievement, but also the actual value the
university places on academics (Barrett, 2014). This only contributed to the debate over
41
whether the university’s athletic success is more important than the education of student-
athletes attending the university.
Understanding the Student-Athlete Experience
Intercollegiate student-athletes navigate their college experience by carrying the
dual responsibility of being both students and athletes. In order to be successful both in
the classroom and in the competitive arena, student-athletes must balance a full academic
course load along with time commitments dedicated to practices, rehabilitation, and
competitions (Parsons, 2013). The time constraints that both academic and athletic
participation independently place upon student-athletes set them apart from students who
do not compete in intercollegiate athletics (Parsons, 2013). With participation in
intercollegiate athletics garnering a significant amount of these student-athletes’ time,
they can become marginal participants within the academic community (Lang et al.,
1988). Their absence from substantial participation in academics has been linked to low
graduation rates, reports of student-athletes failing to meet academic requirements, and
accusations of specialized treatment of student-athletes who are brought into the
university for athletic talents despite low academic achievements (DeBrock et al., 1996;
Parsons, 2013).
Stereotypes and Discrimination
Attention brought to student-athlete academic struggles has led to stereotypes
portraying the population as composed of individuals who care more about athletic
participation than academics (DeBrock et al., 1996; Parsons, 2013). This stigma has been
influenced by multiple variables. It is a fact that intercollegiate athletic participation
requires a significant amount of time, which, in turn, affects the amount of time student-
42
athletes dedicate to academics (Carodine et al., 2001; Fountain & Finley, 2009; Hollis,
2001). Adding to the stigma was the NCAA’s annual public release of the GSR. The
GSR has historically shown that student-athletes, particularly those in high revenue sports
like Division I football and men’s basketball, have struggled to maintain average (70%)
graduation rates (NCAA, 2013b). Hood et al. (1992) argued that the reason why these
two sports produced the lowest GSR was due to the NCAA’s allowance to admit
underprepared student-athletes into their universities for the purposes of winning athletic
competitions and increasing revenue. Although the NCAA does allow for these special
admits to enroll, it adds to the stereotype of the dumb jock when these student-athletes
struggle with the rigors of college academic curriculum (Parsons, 2013). These instances
have added to the assumption that student-athletes simply lack academic ability and are
only present at the university to win competitions (Simons et al., as cited in Parsons,
2013).
Stereotypes Held by Faculty
Leach and Conners (1984) found that perceptions of student-athletes were most
negative among university faculty. Faculty members held strong negative feelings toward
student-athletes, particularly those at high-profile institutions on high-profile teams, and
considered many of the student-athletes undeserving of admissions (Parsons, 2013).
Simon, Van Rheenen, and Covington (2007) found that nearly 60% of student-athletes at
a public, Division I university felt that they were negatively perceived by members of
their college community, and the perception was even stronger for high-profile student-
athletes. Parsons’s (2013) study of student-athlete academic stereotypes found three key
themes that negatively affected how student-athletes were perceived: (a) missed classes
43
that led to special accommodations for student-athletes, (b) athletes were poor students,
and (c) athletes valued athletics more than school.
Missed classes due to competition schedules contributed to the perception that
student-athletes received special treatment (Parsons, 2013). Depending on the timing of
athletic contests, some student-athletes were allowed to take exams on the road and/or
outside of the classroom to accommodate deadlines while traveling. For other classes,
student-athletes were accommodated for their missed time and were given adjusted due
dates based on the timing of the conflict. For some professors, allowing student-athletes
to miss because of athletic participation was strictly unacceptable; however, those
professors who accommodated student-athlete sport schedules were often viewed as
offering specialized treatment to student-athletes (Parsons, 2013). These perceptions
have influenced the negative views associated with student-athlete academic ability.
However, when professors refused to accommodate athletic schedules because they did
not want student-athletes to receive specialized treatment, this hurt the student-athlete’s
ability to complete needed credit hours (Parsons, 2013), which had a direct impact on
their academic achievement.
The faculty perception that student-athletes were incapable of completing the
same coursework as their non-athletic peers also fed into the dumb jock stereotype
(Simons et al., 2007). Because of the negative stereotypes associated with student-
athletes and academia, many believed that some student-athletes, though successful in
their sport, did not deserve to attend the university (Parsons, 2013). Many questioned
why athletes received special admissions, especially those who did not meet the
admission standards required of all other students, when without athletic talent, these
44
student-athletes would have most likely been turned away from the university. The dumb
jock stereotype emphasized an individual’s athletic talent, but degraded his/her academic
ability that led to the assumption that student-athletes placed a higher value on what they
learned on the competitive arena than what they learned in the classroom (Parsons, 2013).
Identity Development
The development of one’s identity is shaped by psychosocial experiences
(Hamachek, 1990). Individuals construct their identity through social interaction,
including interface with family, community, and social surroundings (Johnson &
Migliaccio, 2009). Johnson and Migliaccio (2009) conducted a study that examined the
influence of sports on the identity development of 17 African-American boys. Their
study found that sports were a symbol that represented a gateway into the ideology of the
American Dream, which represented the ultimate success. Johnson and Migliaccio (2009)
found that participation in sports was highly emphasized among the subjects of the study,
despite their understanding that the likelihood of the child entering into a professional
career was low. The major finding in this study points out that encouragement by the
community and family members for these young boys to become heavily associated in
sports had a negative impact on the individuals’ academic success (Johnson &
Migliaccio, 2009). As the children came to understand the importance of their athletic
abilities, their identity as athletes became prominent, while other identities like that of the
student were less emphasized and, therefore, less developed from a young age. Johnson
and Migliaccio (2009) noted that every individual could identify with multiple identities,
but it was how the individual viewed and valued each identity that ultimately decided the
identity with which the individual would identify most prominently. The higher the
45
identity ranked on the level of importance, the greater the influence it had on the way the
individual identified themselves (Johnson & Migliaccio, 2009). For student-athletes who
were essentially labeled with a dual identity, some ranked one of the two identities higher
in level of importance, causing them to focus on one more than the other. For others, the
dual identity struggle came from the difficulty of balancing both roles if one of the two
roles received significantly greater attention than the other, thus leaving the individual
with the struggle to carry out both roles (Eitle & Eitle, 2002; Hoberman, 2000, Johnson &
Migliaccio, 2009).
Holding a dual identity may cause identity confusion, which occurs when multiple
roles interfere and an individual struggles to identify with any of the conflicting roles.
This phenomenon may be partially responsible for the academic and retention problems
that football and men’s basketball student-athletes face (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995).
Student-athletes who have been given the title of a dual identity may suffer from identity
confusion, which leaves them struggling to identify more as a student or as an athlete
(Goldberg & Chandler, 1995). Although not all student-athletes will experience an
identity discrepancy, those that do may often find that holding this particular dual role is
exceedingly difficult, especially when both roles demand time and commitment that
interfere with each other (Killeya-Jones, 2005).
Consequences of Holding a Dual Identity
Killeya-Jones (2005) discussed the challenges of holding the dual identity of a
student-athlete and described the identity as combining two roles, student and athlete,
that conflict with the demands that each role requires. What is particularly unique about
these two identities is the social identity component associated with these two roles. The
46
way in which an individual is identified socially has the ability to directly affect the way
the individual feels about himself/herself and his/her self-worth (Marx, Huffmon, &
Doyle, 2008). William James’s (as cited in Killeya-Jones, 2005) theory of multiple selves
that was further developed in the social identity model of Tajfel and Turner (as cited in
Killeya-Jones, 2005) argued that if a social conflict occurred and one’s identity is
strengthened by the environment around him/her, the individual would find it difficult to
adjust to the other part of the identity placed upon him/her (Killeya-Jones, 2005; Marx et
al., 2008). If this occurred, then individuals would encounter psychosocial discomfort
that could prevent him/her from carrying out the expectations of the other role (Killeya-
Jones, 2005).
What is unique about the student-athlete identity is the power of its social
construct. Individuals who competed in intercollegiate sports, particularly at the Division
I level, were embraced by an environment that positively reinforced athletic participation
through daily practice, as well as interactions with teammates, coaches, fans, peers, and
family (Marx, et al., 2008). When student-athletes found themselves surrounded by an
environment that positively reinforced the athletic identity and their athletic successes, it
elevated their self-esteem and self-worth; this left the student identity vulnerable to taking
on a less meaningful role (Marx et al., 2008). In the examination of role discrepancy of
student-athletes, Killeya-Jones (2005) found that if the individual labeled the two roles in
disparate ways, he/she would experience a problem within one or both parts of his/her
dual identity. The researcher argued that student-athletes who could not find similarities
between the two identities “either (a) modified the expectations associated with one or
the other role, or (b) neglected or de-emphasized one or the other role” (p. 179). If
47
student-athletes experience this notion of identity confusion, then they are likely to either
struggle in athletics when academics are emphasized, or struggle in academics when
athletics are emphasized.
Identity Development of Elite Male Student-Athletes
Special enrollment standards for under qualified student-athletes in relation to
research on student-athlete identity development aimed to explain why some of these
talented student-athletes were failing to succeed academically. Sack and Stravrowsky
(1998), Hollis (2001), and Mangold et al. (2003) have studied the relationship between
intercollegiate athletic participation and postsecondary graduation rates. It is no secret
that intercollegiate football and men’s basketball bring in the highest revenue among all
university sport programs and such programs are known for recruiting student-athletes
for their athletic talents despite lower academic profiles at the time of admission to
college (Hollis, 2001; Hood et al., 1992). DeBrock et al. (1996) identified football and
men’s basketball as the two sports that were at the highest risk of not graduating their
student-athletes. Their argument stemmed from the impression that by participating in
such high-revenue sports, the individuals who competed at this level were surrounded by
athletic commitments and were accustomed to athletic praise that affected their identity
as an athlete and failed to promote any identification as a student (DeBrock, et al., 1996).
When athletic ability was the primary source for college admissions, many of these
student-athletes, particularly special admits, were academically underprepared and did
not have the capacity to perform at the same academic level as their non-athletic college
peers (Lang et al., 1988; Sacks & Stravrowsky, 1998). Poor academic performance
translated to a lack of academic motivation to succeed at the same level as their non-
48
athletic peers (Sack & Stravrowsky, 1998). High-revenue and high-profile athletic teams
have drawn negative attention from critics who questioned the university’s commitment
in holding athletic participants to the same academic standards as the general student
population (DeBrock et al., 1996). Universities and the NCAA have publicly emphasized
that individuals who compete at the collegiate level in any sport are students first and
athletes second. However, based on the academic success and graduation rates of
individuals who compete in elite programs and, at times, based on the admissions
standards of special admits, it is commonly questioned as to whether these participants
are actually more athlete-students, where athletics takes precedence over academic
achievement (Strum, Feltz, & Gibson, 2011).
Misconceptions of Departure
One of the most common assumptions regarding the low completion of male
student-athletes who compete on Division I men’s basketball and football teams lies in
the belief that they are likely to enter into professional athletic careers before reaching
degree completion. Professional careers offered by the National Football League (NFL)
and the National Basketball Association (NBA) can be disruptive to the education of
student-athletes because of their recruitment and draft rules. Unlike Major League
Baseball (MLB), which allows athletes to be drafted after they graduate from high
school, the professional football and basketball leagues require that student-athletes
wait—3 years for the NFL and 1 year for the NBA—between their high school career and
the professional draft (Cavezza, 2010). When student-athletes leave college before
degree completion, it affects the team’s APR and GSR rates. For football and basketball
student-athletes who seek to enter into professional sport careers, these required years
49
between high school and a professional career have led to Division I university athletics
becoming a place for student-athletes to compete while they wait out the years until they
become draft-eligible. Due to rules, elite high school football and basketball student-
athletes are not allowed to enter into professional drafts. Instead, some are admitted into
universities with no plans of earning a college degree (Parsons, 2013), with the goal of
finding a place to play before being eligible for a professional career.
According to the NCAA (2012b), the sport with the highest percentage of student-
athletes to go professional from college was baseball at 9.7%, while only 1.6% of
collegiate football student-athletes and 1.3% of men’s basketball student-athletes entered
into professional careers. Considering the low number of student-athletes who actually
attained professional careers in football and men’s basketball, there was a need to
understand why student-athletes who competed in these two sports were not reaching
graduation success.
Factors Associated with Academic Failure
Student-athlete academic failure has been associated with motivation, academic
struggle, identity values, and problems associated with integration (Lang et al., 1988).
Hollis (2001) described student-athlete academic failure as being associated with a lack
of motivation and a lack of aptitude, particularly among those who are granted admission
despite poor secondary academic achievement. Hollis (2001) also blamed coaches for the
amount of pressure placed on student-athletes to produce winning records as well as
problems with time management. The following section discusses student departure
theories in relation to student-athlete attrition.
50
Student Departure
Departure theories describe factors that affect student retention and have been
cited largely in an attempt to understand student attrition. Theories of departure served as
the conceptual framework for this study on academic support factors that affected
student-athlete levels of persistence to complete college degrees.
Theory of Departure
The most common departure theory associated with explaining student attrition is
Vincent Tinto’s (1988) theory of departure. Tinto drew upon Van Gennep’s (as cited in
Tinto, 1988) rites of passage theory and Durkheim’s (as cited in Tinto, 1988) theory of
suicide to lay a framework that explained the longitudinal progression that led to student
persistence and completion. When looking at student departure rates, Tinto (1988)
developed a theory that emphasized the importance of integration. Departure theory
stresses the importance of the student’s ability to integrate into the college community in
order to have a greater chance of remaining in school to complete a college degree. The
membership established through integration leads to acceptance and helps students adjust
to college, thus increasing their motivation and willingness to complete their college
degrees (Tinto, 1988). Tinto (1988) argued that integration would increase the student’s
probability of reaching degree completion because they would have adjusted to the norms
and have established relationships with members of the new college community; thus,
students would have accepted the values and goals of the new community. Failure to
integrate increased a student’s chance of early departure. In addition to integration, the
theory also addressed the need for student persistence in order to remain in school.
Students had be able to persist through challenges of college life in order to make it to the
51
goal of degree completion. Based on Durkheim’s theory of suicide, if students did not
feel accepted into the college community, then they were likely to feel a lost sense of
shared values, support, and recognition, all of which affected the decision to depart from
the institution (Tinto, 1988).
Durkheim’s theory of suicide is often cited in models of student retention.
Durkheim brought attention to the transitional period where a person who desired to
move from one group to another gives up his/her past associations, but has yet to acquire
new relations with the desired group (Tinto, 1988). Individuals who struggle or who fail
to persist out of this state are likely to experience feelings of isolation. Durkheim’s
theory of suicide stressed that if a person felt he/she was not accepted into his/her
community socially and intellectually, then there was a heightened risk of the individual
feeling a lost sense of belonging, which in turn resulted in departure (Tinto, 1988).
Durkheim’s theory of suicide has been used to explain a student’s decision to depart from
college by comparing factors associated with suicide to those associated with student
dropout. Tinto (1988) drew on Durkheim’s theory by arguing that if a student could
persist through the transition into the college community, he/she increased his/her
chances of persisting to completion.
Influence of Persistence and Adjustment on Student-Athlete College Departure
Researchers have employed Tinto’s theory by focusing on student-athletes’ ability
to adjust to the college environment when having to balance commitments to both
athletics and academics. The specific focus of these studies has examined the
relationship between intercollegiate athletic participation in Division I football and men’s
basketball and their low graduation rates (Leppel, 2006; Mangold et al., 2003; Melendez,
52
2007). Mangold et al. (2003) studied the relationship between intercollegiate participation
and graduation success of student-athletes who competed in football and men’s
basketball. The purpose of the study was to explore student-athlete persistence when
balancing athletic and academic participation to define its effect on institutional
graduation rates. The researchers chose to examine the influence of academic integration
and social integration on student persistence and ability to reach degree completion, and
found that increased social integration did not strengthen academic commitments. Tinto
(as cited in Mangold et al., 2003) found that, “academic involvement led to greater social
involvement [and that] academic integration appeared to have the strongest positive
influence on persistence” (p. 542).
There is empirical evidence to support the argument that if academic integration
occurs before social integration, then students are more likely to remain committed to
academic goals, whereas if social integration occurs first, students may not commit to
academic goals, which has a negative effect on graduation rates (Mangold et al. 2003;
Pascarella & Terenzini, 1983). Intercollegiate athletics facilitated social involvement for
participants and fostered student interactions that were not particularly conducive to
academic integration (Mangold et al., 2003). Although student-athletes must achieve
academic standards in order to be eligible to compete in intercollegiate contests, athletic
participation had a much larger social component (Leppel, 2006).
Impact of Social and Academic Integration
Student-athletes who competed in elite programs like football and men’s
basketball were committed to a sport that took up a significant amount of time that could
have been dedicated to academics (Leppel, 2006). Carodine et al. (2001) examined the
53
impact of athletic participation and found that the time commitment athletics imposed on
student-athletes could negatively affect their academic achievement. Division I athletic
participation in football and men’s basketball required such a large time commitment that
athletic participation distracted student-athletes from focusing on academic goals (Hyatt,
2003; Leppel, 2006). Not only did student-athletes dedicate a significant amount of time
to practices and competitions, but also they were required to miss class for travel, which
took the student-athletes away from their academic environment (Leppel, 2006). Given
the amount of time spent with team members as well as the social following that sporting
events produced, athletic participation has been shown to elevate student-athletes’ levels
of social integration as they established relationships with their teammates, with other
student-athletes who shared the same collegiate experiences, and with the general
population who celebrated their athletic successes (Leppel, 2006; Miller & Kerr, 2002).
Thomas (2000) found that an abundance of social networks could be harmful to a
student’s academic career. If social integration became the priority, academic
performance was in jeopardy of failing (Mangold et al., 2003). If too much attention was
placed on athletics and academics were neglected, then student-athletes found it difficult
to adjust to the demands of being a student, which affected the decision to depart
(Melendez, 2007). Whereas increased social interaction may be a cause for student-
athlete departure before reaching degree completion, there are other researchers who
would disagree.
For example, some research has argued that social interaction could actually have
a positive influence on college student persistence toward degree completion. Bean and
Metzner’s (1985) conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition
54
found that the student’s satisfaction with his/her college experience was influenced by
social interaction, which increased the probability to remain in college and complete
his/her college degree. Relating this concept of increased social interaction to the
persistence of intercollegiate student-athletes, Astin (as cited in Melendez, 2007) found
that “athletic participation was positively associated with overall satisfaction with college
experience, motivation to earn a degree and the development of interpersonal leadership
skills” (p. 41). The social integration piece that athletic participation offers creates a
sense of belonging among individuals entering into a new community (college) and
alleviates the stresses associated with students integrating into new environments (Miller
& Kerr, 2002). Marsh and Kleitman (2002) examined the influence of extracurricular
activities and their impact on student satisfaction, finding that participation in athletics
led to higher levels of self-esteem, which therefore led to higher levels of academic
aspirations and higher levels of academic performance. Based on these findings, it was
important to examine whether this was true specifically for Division I football and men’s
basketball student-athletes.
Academic Services for Student-Athletes
This study focused on the work of academic support services specific to student-
athletes because there was a need to understand practices that would increase student-
athletes’ persistence levels to complete a college degree. This study sought to understand
how academic support units could bridge the completion gap specific to NCAA Division
I men’s basketball student-athletes who have historically graduated at lower rates and
have a lower probability of entering into professional careers than student-athletes in
other sports that have higher rates of graduation. Although academic support services
55
vary from university to university, understanding the different types of roles (i.e.,
academic advisors, learning specialists, academic coordinators, and mentors), the size of
the support unit, and the expectations placed upon the student-athletes to use such
services will yield knowledge that may enhance student-athlete degree completion rates.
Tinto (1993) cited the need for academic and social integration as a tool for
students to find success in post-secondary education. In order for student-athletes to find
a pathway to integration, Hollis (2001) argued that students needed to find connections to
their college environment through interaction with advising and counseling services.
Hollis’s (2001) argument relied heavily on Tinto’s (1993) work that viewed advising
programs that provided students with goal-setting as a necessary resource to help students
validate their presence on campus. Tinto argued that if students were not able to make
and meet goals as they related to their collegiate experience, withdrawal from college was
heightened (Hollis, 2001). Whereas Tinto (1993) spoke to the general student population,
Hollis (2001) related counseling and advisement needs specifically to the student-athlete
population as they have goals associated with both athletics and academic achievements,
and often struggle with navigating a path to both. Student-athletes have to be careful in
planning their academic schedules; due to mandatory athletic obligations, they also have
to make academic decisions that keep them eligible (Hollis, 2001). Although it would be
ideal for student-athletes to simply enroll in easy classes to maintain their grades, the
NCAA’s establishment of eligibility requirements requires student-athletes to show
progression toward degree completion. The utilization of counseling and advisement
services is critical for student-athletes to make sound decisions regarding their academic
56
and athletic statuses. Having access to these types of services helps student-athletes lay a
foundation for reaching athletic and academic goals.
Low graduation rates were also a reflection of the university’s inability to meet
student needs (Mangold et al., 2003). Gunn and Eddy (1989) brought attention to the
effectiveness of support programs offered by the institution and identified student-
athletes as a population with unique needs. As discussed previously, Division I
institutions are permitted to accept student-athletes whether they meet admission
standards or not; therefore, if institutions are going to enroll students with lower
academic profiles and expect them to succeed in the same classes as their peers, then
institutions must consider the appropriate support services, in adherence with NCAA
bylaws, to bridge this achievement gap (Gunn & Eddy, 1989; Hollis, 2002; Melendez,
2007). This affects not just underprepared student-athletes, since student-athletes as a
whole are required to balance the demands of athletic and academic expectations.
As the roles of student and athlete have differing responsibilities, which may
often conflict during the course of a college career, the support personnel that are in place
to provide academic services for student-athletes must have some understanding of both
the role of a student and of an athlete (Gunn & Eddy, 1989; Hollis, 2002). In order for
universities to offer support services for student-athletes, the personnel in charge of
producing the support must first understand and be sensitive to the demands placed on the
student-athlete population. Programs such as orientations, freshman mentoring, advising,
mandated tutoring and study hall, and summer bridge programs have all been associated
with helping student-athletes integrate into the academic college community and offer
support for academic success (Carodine et al., 2001; Gunn & Eddy, 1989; Hollis, 202;
57
Melendez, 2007). Effective support structures for student-athletes should not just support
academic progress; Carodine et al. (2001) advocated that they should also provide life
skill development and serve as mediators between student-athletes and the university.
Universal support models should provide a variety of services to assist student-athletes as
they seek the balance between athletic and academic responsibilities, which include
assistance in personal, career, and academic development (Carodine et al., 2001). Lottes
(1991) suggested that support service models have four main categories (academic,
athletic, personal and social, and general), whereas Etzel, Ferrante, and Pinkney (1996)
proposed that athletic departments should build partnerships with the university’s student
affairs divisions to comprehensively create services that will best serve student-athletes in
succeeding both academically and athletically (Etzel et al., 1996; Lottes, 1991).
Student-Athlete Services
Carodine et al. (2001) supported university programs that allowed student-athletes
to participate in events alongside other incoming freshmen. Carodine et al. (2001) found
that programs such as orientation served the purpose of introducing all students to
information that was directly related to helping students reach graduation. University
orientations fostered interactions among all incoming freshmen and provided resources
available to support students as they began their collegiate experience. In addition to
university orientations, the researchers also supported athletic orientations that informed
student-athletes on issues that related directly to athletic participation (Carodine et al.,
2001). For example, some institutions offered classes that were designed to address
current issues in intercollegiate athletics with the purpose of addressing issues related to
the student-athletes, which included information dealing with academic, athletic, and
58
financial issues, along with class/unit credit information, all of which helped to support
student-athlete success at the university (Gerdy, 1997).
Career development was also found to play an integral part in a student-athlete’s
college experience. Etzel et al. (1994) conducted a needs assessment that found five
career development needs associated with student-athlete concerns in understanding:
career interests, skills, planning, personality, and values. Carodine et al. (2001) argued
that student-athlete support services that fostered relationships with the university career
centers espoused academic and personal development for their student-athletes.
Comprehensive student-athlete support programs nurtured a culture that sought to
understand how student-athletes’ values and interests related to possible career objectives
and choices (Winston, 1996). The inclusion of career development was found to have
helped student-athletes learn about their own interests, which was suggested to influence
career choice (Sandeen, 1996). Prior research suggested that support services that offered
career development may help student-athletes find value in their academic experience,
which in turn supported student-athlete academic motivation and was also essential since
a vast majority did not go pro.
Conclusion
The review of literature highlighted the issues related to Division I football and
men’s basketball student-athlete degree completion. The literature underscored the need
for academic support services that help the student-athlete balance between a full-time
academic course load and the hours dedicated to athletic participation. As the literature
provided background of the problem and also discussed current support programs in
place at Division I institutions, the factors associated with student persistence were
59
imperative to examining the problem. Chapter three will provide the methodology and
analysis that were employed through the investigation of academic support services and
factors that affected student-athlete college completion, particularly as it pertained to
Division I men’s basketball.
60
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study was to identify factors that supported student-athlete
persistence towards degree completion in Division I men’s basketball programs. Because
Division I men’s basketball (and football) have the lowest college graduation rates, it was
important to identify factors that worked to retain these students until they reached degree
completion. This study sought to specifically analyze academic support services that
affected Division I men’s basketball student-athletes with the intention of closing the gap
on the academic retention issues that have historically plagued this population. In this
chapter, the research design for this study is presented, along with a description of the
methodology, the site where the study was conducted, the population and sample,
information regarding the instrumentation used in collecting data, evidence from the data
collection, and the process of analyzing the data.
Main Research Question
Given the purpose, the following research questions guided the inquiry in this
research study:
1. What was the role of academic support services in student-athlete degree
completion?
a. How did academic support help student-athletes bridge the scholar and
athlete identities?
b. How were academic support services designed to influence progress
towards degree completion?
c. What were the experiences of student-athletes who used academic
support services to assist in their degree completion?
61
d. How did the academic support staff measure the effectiveness of
services for student-athletes and its impact on degree completion?
Research Design
This study utilized qualitative methods. The study was best suited for a
qualitative approach because the research questions were interested in discovering
experiences (Merriam, 2009). The purpose behind qualitative research is to understand
how people use their experiences to make sense of their lives (Merriam, 2009). Because
this study was looking specifically at the student-athlete experience using academic
support services, with the purpose of understanding how it affected individual persistence
to reach college completion, a qualitative case study approach was deemed most
appropriate for this type of research. In order to do this, the study took on an additional
dimension to qualitative research known as the case study approach. Merriam (2009)
described the case study approach as an empirical study that examines real experiences in
real time contexts. When utilizing the case study approach, the problem under
investigation must be intrinsically bounded, creating parameters around the focus of the
study and defining what will and will not be investigated through the research (Merriam,
2009). The case study approach to qualitative research is not particularly concerned with
the methods, but more so in the questioning and the knowledge gained through
understanding the experiences rooted in the context (Merriam, 2009). This method tried
to gain contextual knowledge of how college persistence was affected by the experiences
of Division I men’s basketball student-athletes who utilized academic support services
during their undergraduate experience.
62
Site Selection
The institution selected for this research study was a private, U.S. mid major
university in the Western region of the United States. The institution being studied was
given a pseudonym and will be referred to as St. Andrews University (SAU) throughout
the study. SAU is a 4-year, postsecondary institution that offered bachelor’s degrees,
master’s degrees, and doctoral degrees. This university offered 42 undergraduate majors
and minors. The university was committed to creating an academic community that
centralized on a mission that educates and fosters the development of student growth,
with the intention of creating complex, compassionate, and conscious citizens of our
society. With its religious affiliation, the university was devoted to innovation that
fostered development of all members of the campus community. This university ranked
among the nation’s top five in graduation rates among all U.S. mid major universities.
The total undergraduate enrollment of this institution was around 5,500, with more than
300 student-athletes participating in 18 NCAA Division I athletic programs.
Department of Athletics
The University’s Department of Intercollegiate Athletics housed eight men’s and
nine women’s athletic programs that competed at the NCAA Division I level. The
mission of the Athletic Department was rooted in the university’s values of educating the
students into well-rounded individuals, and aimed to create those values through athletic
participation that fostered life skills in and out of sports. The university, along with the
Athletic Department, was dedicated to the recruitment of the most elite student-athletes
who desired to succeed in both the academic and athletic communities. It recognized the
commitment made by its student-athletes to compete in both sports and the classroom,
63
and was dedicated to providing support services and resources that assisted student-
athletes in their academic and personal development. This university’s commitment to
excellence both in and out of the classroom made it the best/most ideal site for this study.
The Men’s Basketball Program
SAU’s men’s basketball program was a leader in Division I graduation rates.
According the NCAA’s GSR, 100% of the men’s basketball student-athletes graduated
from SAU since beginning college in 2004. The men’s basketball program also held the
highest APR rate among all other teams in its nationally recognized athletic conference.
In recent years, the men’s basketball program also saw athletic success in post-season
competition. This level of success stands in contrast to much of the literature about
NCAA men’s basketball and football teams, which often have lower rates of college
completion. The SAU men’s basketball program was chosen for this study because of its
successful graduation rates, in an effort to understand how academic support may have
contributed to this success. Due to the high level of excellence in graduation rates,
SAU’s program was ideal for this study.
The 2014 SAU men’s basketball team was composed of 14 student-athletes with
four seniors, one junior, five sophomores, and four freshmen. The staff consisted of one
head coach, one associate head coach, two assistant coaches, one director of basketball
operations, one video coordinator, two team managers, and one academic advisor. The
2012-2013 collective APR for the SAU men’s basketball team was 984 (NCAA, 2012a),
whereas the average APR score for all of Division I men’s basketball was 957 and the
average APR for all Division I student-athletes was 976 (NCAA, 2014). Because SAU’s
men’s basketball team was exceeding the overall student-athlete APR average along with
64
meeting 100% graduation rates for the past 4 years, this institution was an ideal site to
conduct this study, which aimed to uncover promising practices for increasing graduation
rates for the men’s basketball student-athlete population.
Population and Sample
In order to find participants for interviews, the following criteria was employed
when searching for student-athletes and support staff who were appropriate for this study.
Student-Athlete Population
Participants for the interviews were selected using nonprobability sampling
(Merriam, 2009). Merriam (2009) describes non-probabilistic sampling, which is also
known as “purposive…or purposeful” (p. 77) sampling, as selecting participants based on
meeting criteria set by the researcher. For the purpose of this study, former student-
athletes were interviewed. Participants were found by contacting current athletic
department staff, who identified possible candidates. Snowball sampling was then
utilized to expand the candidate pool. In order to participate in this research, the
following criteria must have been met: (a) participants must have successfully completed
an undergraduate degree from SAU within the last 10 years, (b) participants must have
been a member of the university’s Division I men’s basketball team, (c) participants must
have also began their college career at the university (not a transfer student), and
(d) participants must have competed on the men’s basketball team throughout their entire
undergraduate career. This study included participation from all qualified former
student-athletes regardless of admission status and those who received full-scholarship,
partial-scholarship, or were walk-on (receiving no athletic aid money) student-athletes. If
more than five to seven participants volunteered for interviews, participants were
65
purposively chosen based on majors and graduation years in order to diversify the
participant pool. Lastly, support staff were asked to participate as well and must have
met the following criterion: staff participants must have worked directly with the men’s
basketball student-athlete population.
Academic Support Staff
Another part of this study was focused on gaining the perspective of the academic
support staff within the university who currently support or who have had experience
supporting men’s basketball student-athletes. Staff in the Academic and Student Services
department within the Department of Athletics were interviewed along with university
advisors and faculty. The athletic department’s website was utilized in order to find the
academic support services staff within the athletic department. The academic support
staff was interviewed and asked to identify faculty or staff within the athletic department
and the university who have also played key roles in the academic support of men’s
basketball student-athletes and they were contacted for interviews. This type of
recruitment is known as snowball sampling (Merriam, 2009).
Instrumentation
Potential student-athlete participants were sent an introductory email (Appendix
A) along with a link to a pre-research survey (Appendix B). Former student-athletes
were asked to answer the pre-research survey questions in order to: (a) verify that they
were willing to participate, (b) verify that they met the criteria and demographic for
participation, and (c) gain contact information for those willing to participate. In this
initial phase, former student-athletes were also notified of compensation they would
66
receive for their participation. Once former student-athletes were identified as qualified
and willing participants, they were contacted by the researcher to schedule an interview.
Academic support staff were identified through the department’s website. Staff
was then contacted through email addresses provided through the website. The initial
email (Appendix C) introduced the study, provided the purpose of their participation,
offered compensation, and asked them to complete a survey (Appendix D) to determine
their qualifications and willingness to participate. For those willing, the initial email also
asked for them to provide phone contact information. Staff members who chose to
participate were contacted to schedule an interview.
The research protocols for this study consisted of open-ended questions designed
to explore persistence gained through the utilization of academic support services offered
through the Department of Athletics. There were two interview protocols: one for
student-athletes (Appendix D) and one for the academic support staff (Appendix E).
Both utilized the same structure. Interviews were conducted utilizing the semi-structured
approach. Merriam (2009) describes the semi-structured interview as one that offers
flexibility in the way interviews are constructed and carried out. The semi-structured
interview was guided by questions that were not necessarily determined prior to the
interview (Merriam, 2009). This technique allowed the researcher to gain a deeper
understanding of the respondents’ experiences by allowing the researcher to handle
unpredicted responses from participants (Merriam, 2009). This approach allowed the
researcher to adapt to the direction of each interview as necessary (Merriam, 2009).
The interview protocol was constructed with open-ended questions. Through
open-ended questioning, the researcher was able to gain information from participants
67
who were able to progressively reflect on their own experience to offer firsthand
knowledge of the study’s focus area (Creswell, 2009). To reduce any unforeseen
problems with the interview protocol, a pilot interview was conducted prior to the
research study. Merriam (2009) suggests that a pilot interview should be conducted
before the formal interview in order to refine the type of questions being used as well as
the researcher’s interview skills. Therefore, the interview protocol was field tested
through a pilot interview with participants from other athletic teams.
The final piece of data collection came from document analysis. Documents offer
data that come from ready-made sources, making data easily assessable and useful to the
researcher (Merriam, 2009). This study utilized public information provided by the
NCAA, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, and the institution. The study
also sought to obtain physical material and artifacts found within the study setting. The
documents found through this study were used to gain data similar to that which emerged
from the interviews. It was for the researcher to keep an open mind when it came to
discovering relevant material by setting aside assumptions about where relevant material
could be found (Merriam, 2009). The documents were assessed for authenticity, which
required an investigation into the history of each artifact (Merriam, 2009). The
researcher adopted a coding system, which required her to categorize the documents that
assisted in the organization of information and in the interpretation of the documents.
Merriam (2009) suggested that the data found through document analysis could provide
descriptive information as well as historical understanding that verified and advanced
findings from the study.
68
Data Collection
Once research participants were identified, each one was given an information
sheet and encouraged to ask questions. Participants were provided with an overview of
the study and interview expectations via email along with expectations and rights.
Participants were then asked to grant consent to their willingness to participate in this
study. Once this step was completed, participants also had to agree to take part in a
formal semi-structured individual interview either by phone, in person, or via Skype.
Participants were expected to take part in one formal interview not to exceed 60 minutes,
and were informed that follow-up interviews might have been necessary.
For interviews that took place in person, the researcher conducted these in a quiet
office or conference room setting located on the SAU campus. Pseudonyms were
provided for each participant to protect her or his identity. At the start of each formal
interview, the participants were asked for permission to record the interview through an
audio recording device that was placed between the participant the researcher to ensure
both voices were captured. Once recording consent was confirmed, the researcher
restated information provided about the purpose of the study, reviewed confidentiality,
and reviewed participants’ rights with them.
Once the previous steps were completed, the researcher began asking the
interview questions using the protocol that was designed to gain rich information. Using
the semi-structured approach to the interview protocol, the researcher was able to probe
and ask for clarification when necessary. Whereas the questions from the protocol sought
to capture information provided by the participants, the researcher also took notes on the
respondents’ answers and made notes of observations and reasons for clarifications and
69
additional probes to questions from the protocol. Once the interview was completed, the
researcher noted the length of the interview, and provided the participant with
compensation. Immediately after the interview was completed and the participant was no
longer present, the researcher took the time to reflect on each interview to make notes
about observations, participant responses, and thoughts regarding the information shared
by the participant. Taylor and Bogdan (1984) viewed this process as a reflective piece so
the researcher could document behaviors and observations before losing them in their
memory. Merriam (2009) suggested that the researcher take notes of the physical setting,
date and time of the interview, and any subtle factors that were unplanned during the
interview.
Data Analysis
Merriam (2009) defined data analysis as “the process of making sense out of
data” (p. 175). In order to make sense of the data, all interviews were transcribed, after
which the researcher considered the responses and observations that would help to
answer the central research questions. This ultimately led to the process that Merriam
(2009) referred to as segmenting. By segmenting, responses and observations were
sorted into units that allowed for meaningful information to be separated from less useful
data (Merriam, 2009). Once meaningful data was segmented, the data was then
categorized. Merriam (2009) described categorizing as placing data in units based on
“theme, pattern, finding, or an answer to a research question” (p. 178). Taking Merriam’s
(2009) suggestion to categorize the data, coding with symbols helped the researcher find
categorical information across multiple pieces of data. Coding with symbols allowed the
researcher to divide the data quickly while also helping her understand how the data was
70
beginning to answer the central research questions. Once data w collected through the
matching of symbols, each category was given a name based on the theme or finding.
Validity
Because qualitative data requires analysis and interpretation of personal
experience, validity comes into question when reporting findings. In qualitative research,
it is important to find themes based on what the respondents reported, and not just look
for themes the researcher expects to find. Merriam (2009) highlighted the need for the
researcher to understand the respondents’ perspective and not simply place respondent
data in categories for the sake of answering the research question. In order to increase
the credibility of the data found, the researcher must reach back out to the respondents
and ask them to review the findings to ensure that the data reports accurately depict their
experience. Merriam (2009) refers to this as respondent validity, which was one strategy
for ensuring credibility in this study.
Role of Researcher
As the researcher for this qualitative study, it was my responsibility to ensure the
research was done in an ethical manner to protect my integrity and that of my
participants. To protect the identity of my participants and the practices of the institution
being studied, each was given a pseudonym. In addition, each participant was given
accurate information regarding the purpose of the study as well as expectations and the
process of data collection, and then was asked for documented consent. Participants were
continuously reminded that they had a right to privacy at any and all points during the
data collection process.
71
It was also imperative that I, as the researcher, understood and identified my
personal biases associated with this study. As an individual who has my own experience
as an intercollegiate student-athlete, it was important that I tried not to expect my
participants’ experiences to be similar to my own. As a professional who works within
the field of study, it was also important that I prevent my own experiences working with
student-athletes in academic support services from impairing or influencing the study.
The following chapter will report the results from the study and seek to provide answers
to the research questions guiding this study.
72
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
As discussed earlier, the purpose of this study was to identify academic support
factors that affected student-athlete degree completion for those who participated in a
Division I men’s basketball program. After collecting and analyzing the evidence found
in this qualitative research case study, the next step was to present the findings
throughout this next chapter. The findings presented through this chapter are based on
the research questions:
a. How does academic support help student-athletes bridge the scholar and
athlete identities?
b. How are academic support services designed to influence progress towards
degree completion?
c. What are the experiences of student-athletes who use academic support
services to assist in their degree completion?
d. How does the academic support staff members measure the effectiveness of
services for student-athletes and its impact on degree completion?
Participants
There were 10 total participants for this study. Participants included academic
staff (N = 5) and former Division I men’s basketball student-athletes (N = 5).
Recruitment for advisement staff was conducted through emails and snowball sampling.
While the focus of this study was centered on student-athlete academic support services,
the services and those who provide them were not limited to those only available to
student-athletes. The academic advisement participants included one undergraduate
73
university advisor, two undergraduate university advisors/faculty, and two athletic
academic support staff (see Table 5).
Table 5
SAU Academic Support Staff Participant Information
Pseudonym Gender Title
Dolly F University Advisor/Senior Lecturer
Steph M Assistant Dean of Undergraduate Advising
Jeff M Academic Support Manager
Crystal F University Advisor/Senior Lecturer
Carly F Academic Counselor/Compliance Coordinator
Recruitment of former student-athletes was also conducted through email and
snowball sampling. Factors such as field of study did not impact participant recruitment,
but will be noted. All former student-athlete participants were members of the Division I
men’s basketball program at SAU throughout their entire undergraduate careers and each
student-athlete participant earned an undergraduate degree (see Table 6).
Table 6
SAU Former Student-Athlete Information
Pseudonym Major
Mark Business Finance
James Business Finance
JT Political Science
Kyle Bio Chemistry
Malcolm Business Management
Findings
The following section identifies key themes that emerged from the interviews,
organized around the broader research questions for this study. The data showed that
academic support helps student-athletes develop in a number of ways. The following
74
section will uncover those themes and elaborate upon them based on the interview
findings.
Theme 1
Theme 1 found that collaboration between the university and athletics advisement
staffs play a key role in the academic success of SAU student-athletes. The data revealed
that SAU offers multiple layers of academic support services. There are essentially two
layers of advising available to help SAU students’ progress towards degree completion,
but for athletes, there are three. For all SAU students, the university offers academic
support services through an undergraduate advisement center. Any SAU undergraduate
student can seek free academic advisement through this office. Three support staff
members who participated in this study were housed under the university advisement
staff. A second layer of academic support is provided through an assigned faculty
advisor. Every student is given a faculty advisor from his/her specific major department;
he/she must meet with this advisor annually during the month of May. Faculty advisors
provide students with specific information directly regarding the students’ specific area
of study.
SAU student-athletes are given a third layer of academic advising through the
athletic department. The SAU athletic department provides students-athletes with an
academic advisor specifically assigned to individual teams to help provide a third layer of
academic support that is tailored not only to provide degree advising but to also assist
with NCAA eligibility, time management, and learning skills to promote academic
success. Whereas the undergraduate advisors report directly to the university, the athletic
academic advisors report to the SAU athletic department. As a way to unify athletics and
75
the university, the academic advisors in athletics bridge the relationship with the
university by attending the undergraduate advisement center’s weekly meetings.
The multiple layers of advising that are available to and required of the SAU
students and particularly the student-athlete population proved to be a factor in what
helps the students of SAU reach graduation. Dolly, a senior lecturer and also a university
advisor, referred to the multiple layers available to student-athletes as a triage of support.
She feels the value of each layer with an added communication piece is a big part of the
reason why student-athletes, particularly men’s basketball student-athletes, do not slip
through the cracks and why the graduation rate remains high:,
My feeling is that coordination between the advising center, the athletic advisors
— perhaps the coaches, although I don’t interact directly with them, but I know
the athletic advisors do — [and] the faculty, they get into a scenario where they
are all communicating together and [student-athletes] don’t slip through, or they
can’t. It’s much harder for them to go unnoticed … that’s what’s made a
difference. It’s not just a single point that got them [students], but they were
checked up on at multiple nodes and that there is coordination across those nodes.
Dolly believes the relationship between athletic advisors and university advisors is
continuing to grow and is beneficial for supporting student-athletes. She commented on
the attendance of the athletics staff in the weekly meetings with the university advisement
center. She believes that because the athletic department is present in these meetings on a
regular basis, the athletic advisors bring another layer of support and are able to
collaborate with university advisors in finding the best ways to support their student-
athletes:
I think in terms of us as academic advisors, it’s been really helpful to have the
athletic advisors in meetings. There were years and years where I didn’t talk to
the athletic support staff at all, and it’s been really useful. Maybe [we as
advisors] don’t realize that these [students] are athletes, and that shared
experience comes to light and that makes for much better advising.
76
Crystal, who is also a senior lecturer and also a university advisor, agreed. She added,
I have had so much more interaction with the athletes themselves here than I did
before. And I also have much more regular and consistent communication with
the athletic advising staff here than where I was before. At my previous
institution, I would occasionally see the tutor who was assigned to a particular
athlete, I rarely would see the athlete myself, the tutors would come in and ask for
the information and I never met with an [athletic] advisor at my former institution.
It appears that having the athletic advisors present in collaboration meetings was a benefit
to the overall advisement of the student-athlete when individual advisors, whether a
university/faculty advisor or the athletic advisor, would meet with them. Because of the
added academic support and advising that is offered through athletics, their ability to
collaborate has allowed the academic support staff to support students from three
different areas. It is important to note that the staff perspective was not particularly
aligned with the student perspective. Whereas the former student-athlete participants
identified advisement as a key resource, their understanding of how advisors supported
them was not fully recognized. This will be addressed in Theme 2.
Theme 2
Theme 2 found that SAU men’s basketball student-athletes’ academic success was
affected by the academic support services, even though the students may not recognize it.
Whereas some of the student-athletes interviewed did not specifically state that the
academic support services (whether provided by athletics or the university) were
detrimental to their academic success, their reports on the services provided and required
by the academic support structure demonstrated that academic support services directly
affected their academic success.
77
Study hall. All five student-athletes identified study hall as a support service in
which they were mandated to participate. When asked about academic support services
utilized during their first year, the majority referenced study hall. James in particular
found study hall to be helpful. He stated,
Having study hall during my second quarter at SAU positively impacted my
ability to be successful academically. I was able to have a place to study and a
time to study and get into a routine where I was studying in a productive manner.
Malcolm agreed that study hall helps because it makes the individual study. For some,
study hall was a space for students to set aside a time in a designated space to get their
academic work done.
On the other hand, three participants felt that study hall was a complete waste of
time. Mark described study hall as a place in the library where students would sign in but
would goof off for the mandated time they were expected to be there. Kyle felt similarly,
stating,
I did not work well around other people and I never have. So I would come in
study hall and read for a half and hour, then goof off for the remaining hour and a
half that I was there and then go back to my room and do work by myself.
While study hall may not have been beneficial for some, the most interesting response
came from JT:
You know we had a really stupid rule my senior year [regarding] mandatory study
hall for underclassmen, which really pissed me off because [here’s] my take on it:
people refer to us a kids and we are grown ass men. We are adults, ok, we’re
supposed to be adults, we are 19, 20-year old men, we’re supposed to act like
men, we should not be forced into study hall [we] should be doing that on [our]
own.
The desired expectation to be treated like an adult and not be forced into a study hall
appeared to have a positive impact on students like JT, despite their negative outlook.
78
Because JT felt that student-athletes should be expected to do work on their own, his
attitude promoted independence and personal responsibility.
No participant indicated that study hall was a support service offered by the
university; instead it was a support service provided by the academic unit within the
athletic department and mandated by the men’s basketball coaching staff. Though it was
not a service provided by the university, it is important to discuss, as all student-athlete
participants mentioned their involvement with it.
Tutoring. Discussions of tutoring services also emerged from the research. SAU
offers undergraduate tutoring through the university’s advisement center that is available
for free to all students, including student-athletes. While it appeared that at the time
when JT and Malcolm were student-athlete, the athletic department offered tutoring, in
recent years that program has ceased to exist. They were the only student-athletes to
reference specific tutors within athletics; the other participants identified the tutors
through the university. Steph outlined the current tutoring program at SAU:
In terms of our programs with tutoring, there’s no mandatory piece for anyone on
campus to use tutoring. As far as academic support structures, first of all, tutoring
is available to everyone at no cost, so we fund the program. It’s available to every
student. We do our best to make sure that we accommodate student-athletes
where possible when there are scheduling conflicts and stuff like that.
It seemed that tutors are not available for every subject or every class. If students needed
specific tutors, Steph worked with his staff to see if he could help to find one. If that was
not the case, the student was encouraged to visit the individual department or reach out to
the professor during office hours for assistance.
Though not mandated by any formal rule or requirement, three of the five student-
athletes chose to utilize tutoring for additional academic support at some point throughout
79
their academic career. JT, Mark, and Kyle all indicated that they utilized university
tutoring at some point during their undergraduate career and each found the service to
benefit their academic career. The participants were able to use the tutoring services to
gain clarity on subjects that gave them difficulties. Mark reflected on his experience and
was able to work in tutoring sessions around his class and practice schedules in order to
get additional help in math, “Math was the only class I used a tutor for. I would go in, I
think on Wednesdays, right after class at 7 p.m., and I would go in there for an hour and
just work through homework.” Kyle found that the tutoring services were most beneficial
during basketball season. When in competition season, Kyle felt that the tutors helped
him to stay on top of his academics. He stated, “[Tutoring] was very helpful. I realized
that during conference season that I needed it because I was falling behind. It was very
helpful.” JT explained that he only used tutoring services during his freshman year. The
tutors helped him integrate into the college academic environment and assisted him in
managing his study habits. Once he was able to essentially “figure it out,” he no longer
felt the need to use them.
In contrast, Malcolm and James specified that they did not employ the support of
tutoring. When asked why he never sought out tutoring services, Malcolm stated,
I was confident that I was going to get either an A or a B, and if I had extra time, I
was going to put extra time into athletics unless I felt that I was really struggling,
but I never felt that.
For James, part of the reason why he did not use tutoring services was because he implied
that he was not confident that tutoring services were available. He also echoed
Malcolm’s use of extra time, stating, “I’m sure tutoring was available outside of
academics … that I could have used, but I did not take advantage of any of that. I
80
probably had too much going on, too much social life, but also with athletics.” In sum,
those student-athletes that chose to utilize tutoring walked away with a positive
experience, one that was a benefit to the individual’s academic path.
May advising. When the student-athletes were asked about mandatory academic
support in which they were required to participate, only one of the five participants
mentioned the mandatory faculty advising. None of the other four made any reference to
this support service. Although Kyle did discuss the faculty advising support service, his
experience with his advisor appeared to have had no impact on his academic path outside
of his mandatory meetings. Instead, Kyle chose to seek advice from another member of
his major department,
There’s one advisor on the university campus who [was] a biology professor, and
he was not a med school advisor, we had a med school advisor but I never really
talked to him. I talked to this guy instead because we had a really good
relationship. He was super helpful in terms of telling me what a good route would
be to pursue … he would give me advice on what classes to take, and what to do
… [he] suggested what schools to apply for medical school based on what I was
interested in doing … I wouldn’t have known any of that without him.
As discussed earlier, mandatory faculty advising was set in place to give all SAU
students more individualized support. Although advisor/student relationships may vary
based on how the two get along, students may or may not find their advisor to be invested
in their academic path. Because the university assigns advisors to students, students may
find their assigned advisor to be unhelpful, similar to the experience shared by Kyle, and
thereby reducing the efficacy of this intervention. However, due to the supportive nature
of SAU, Kyle was able to establish a positive relationship with one of his course
professors who was able to advise and mentor him in a positive way during his
undergraduate career.
81
It can be concluded that mandatory faculty advising can either positively
influence a student’s academic career or have little to no impact. It does not appear that
faculty advising negatively affects the student-athlete’s persistence to reach degree
completion.
Although four of the participants failed to mention the faculty advisement
component, participants did discuss faculty office hours as a resource for additional
academic support. When students struggle academically, advisors encourage them to
meet with the professor during his/her office hours. According to Dolly and Crystal,
faculty members are mandated to provide office hour support so students can come by or
make appointments for additional help. Because professors are the most knowledgeable
when it comes to their own course work and expectations, Malcolm wished that he had
taken more advantage of the office hours, stating, “I definitely wish I would have taken
advantage of office hours with professors, which is something that obviously you don’t
have to be an athlete to take advantage of … I wish I did a better job at that.”
According to Dolly, the SAU faculty members are required to offer 3-4 office
hours a week. Crystal added that faculty members need to be available during those hours
to everyone for drop-in advising help and/or academic support. When any student
struggles academically in a course, the first resource SAU support recommends is the
faculty member teaching the course. Whether students take advantage of a professor’s
office hours is solely on them, but the university mandates that the support be available.
Athletic advisor. All five former student-athlete participants utilized the
academic advisor that was made available to them through athletics. The student-athletes
viewed this person as someone to whom they could go not just for academic advisement,
82
but also as a resource for academic help and encouragement. Kyle’s experience shows
this essence,
A lot of the support I got from the academic advisor in athletics was a lot of
encouragement and positivity about what I wanted to do. They helped me
schedule classes around practice, and the biggest thing for me was when I had
required labs that impacted practice times, they helped the coaches understand
that I would have to miss practice. Just having that connection between academics
and coaching staff to understand what was really important in terms of
scheduling, I think that was the biggest [support] for me.
When asked about any impactful moments that he experienced while using the athletic
academic support, Kyle said,
Just hearing from the academics support staff that they were willing to do
whatever I needed them to do, like just being able to sit down and go over my
classes and to hear somebody say I’m going to do whatever I can to help you out
because it’s my job and it wasn’t necessarily just one moment, but that feeling
that I got was very promising and very positive and I liked that.
James also felt supported by his athletic academic advisor, whom he felt took the time to
specifically help him plan a desirable academic path toward graduation. He felt that his
advisor helped him maximize his education:
[My advisor] did a good job of ensuring I met with him about my classes, as well
as what I planned to take and was planning to take going into my future. [He
helped me to] maximize the time and efficiency to get my degree, as well as
ensuring I was on top of my assignments and keeping me accountable for going to
class and things of that nature.
JT attributes the academic advising at SAU with helping him reach the goal of
graduation. Although he did not feel that he would have fallen through the cracks
without it, he agreed that the advising he received helped him along his process:
The academic advising and making sure I was on track was really nice … they
definitely helped. But I mean, I probably still would have graduated without them
but it did help. It just made the process easier for me.
83
Malcolm’s experience was similar to JT’s. When asked about the resources from his
undergraduate experience to which he attributed earning his college degree, Malcolm
noted,
I would say the support services we were given as athletes were helpful in
achieving my degree. The advisor — we had the same guy all 4 years. He was
helpful again in a logistical standpoint. I’m 100% confident I would have been
fine and graduated if I didn’t have that.
Although some of the student-athletes may have felt they would have been successful
without their academic advisor, what they did not realize was that their advisor was also
monitoring other areas that directly affected the student-athlete experience in ensuring
that they had an environment for success.
Carly, a former athletic academic support members who worked directly with the
SAU men’s basketball program, explained the role of an academic support provider
within the athletics realm:
I worked mainly with academic monitoring for men’s and women’ basketball.
Obviously, making sure they reach NCAA eligibility standards, as well as
standards set forth by the school. [My responsibilities] would include daily
monitoring of academics for some. I might have four to five [student-athletes] that
were very high-achieving and would just come in and have to do the hours they
were required to do, but then there was a larger group, [maybe] seven to eight,
that I need to help prioritizing their time [and who needed] individualized
meetings [to] make sure that they were following through on their assignments.
Outside of academics, I worked somewhat with compliance and I did the initial
eligibility for all incoming student-athletes. The next biggest task was housing
being the liaison between the athletic office and housing, and then financial aid to
make sure [student-athletes’] accounts were balanced [and] holds were removed.
Although the student-athletes may only associate specific academic support with the role
of their athletic academic advisor, none of them recognized their impact on the other
areas. Without the monitoring of NCAA eligibility, student-athletes may fail to fulfill
progress toward degree requirements, which can render them ineligible and unable to
84
compete. NCAA eligibility is set forth to ensure that student-athletes progress toward a
college degree in timely manner. Each quarter/semester, athletes must meet requirements
that are monitored by the athletic academic support staff to ensure athletes are compliant.
Similarly, a few athletes felt that the athletic academic advisement minimally
affected academic success, but it was certainly not a negative experience. Even those like
Kyle, who felt that he did not need a lot of support, credited his athletic academic advisor
with helping him ensure that he was on track and meeting all requirements to stay eligible
and graduate. Malcolm agreed with Kyle and stated that his athletic advisor was a helpful
benefit, but he did not think it drastically affected how he was going to do in college.
Altogether, the athletic academic advisor was found to be beneficial to the
student-athletes’ academic support experience. Even if the student-athlete felt he did not
need a lot of support, there was nothing negatively associated with this role and the
experiences of the student-athlete participants. In sum, the athletic advisor was the
primary resource of academic support for the student-athletes. They would help the
student-athletes find university resources that would also further their progress toward
graduation. Whether the participant felt that they needed support in bridging the student
and athlete identities, they utilized the academic support offered through athletics at some
point in their undergraduate career as a resource for help and/or guidance in their path
toward graduation.
Theme 3
Theme 3 found that self-motivation played a key role in the academic success of
the student-athletes. By using the lens of identity development, one key theme that
emerged centered around self-motivation for success. Jeff’s interview highlighted the
85
sense of academic pride at SAU. He discusses the overall caliber of the student and
student-athlete population:
I would say that SAU bring[s] in a high caliber of students. As a result, we needed
to recruit students that were of a higher academic caliber. I would also say that,
even for those that did not have as high of a foundation, SAU is the type of
university where if you want to succeed, resources are available.
Of the five student-athletes interviewed, the majority referenced their own personal self-
motivation as a key factor in achieving academic success. Malcolm attributed his self-
motivation to succeed in the classroom to his competitive nature he developed through
basketball,
[Academically] I did well growing up. I feel like I always tried to get good grades
in [school]. I took a handful of honors courses, I remember taking honors English,
I think some honors math, I did Advanced Placement [AP] history, AP calculus,
and I think maybe AP English. I think I always viewed myself first as an athlete
and everything else came after. I always saw myself as a basketball player first, or
at least that is how I prioritized with how I went about things. It was what I
enjoyed the most. I always wanted to do well in school just as someone being
competitive, and I knew it was important.
Malcolm pointed out that transferable skills are developed through both athletics and
academics. His competitive nature gained through basketball had an impact on his
motivation to succeed academically. Similarly, Kyle also used basketball as a vehicle for
success, but more importantly recognized that basketball was not going to be a career
after college:
Always a student first. I viewed myself as a successful athlete for sure, but I also
viewed myself as an athlete that knew I wasn’t always going to play sports, so as
much as I loved sports and I was good at them, I was going to use sports as a way
to open other doors for myself.
JT’s perspective aligned with Kyle’s. He expressed his desire to focus on the student role
because he did not want to rely on a professional basketball career. JT, however, wanted
86
to use his athletic ability to afford him the opportunity to be a student at a place where he
felt he would not be able to have such an experience otherwise:
I knew I wasn’t going to play professionally, at least I didn’t think I would, so a
huge thing for me when picking my college was, I want to go to a place that I
wouldn’t have been able to go to if I didn’t play basketball. Once I got to college
I said, ok I’m a student, I’m always going to be a student even when I graduate.
The personal self-motivation to succeed was obvious in the student-athletes’ goal of
completing their degrees. It did not appear that the students interviewed entered college
with the intention of not completing a college degree. None of the participants
referenced the goal of being “one and done,” a common phrase used for basketball
student-athletes entering college for the sole purpose of playing for 1 year before leaving
for a professional basketball career. That particular phrase has coined a stereotype that
surrounds men’s basketball student-athletes as highlighted by Mark; “There is a certain
stigma around student-athletes that they are handed everything, there’s a prima donna
kind of stigma that depending on how you handle it can follow you around.”
Particularly for men’s basketball student-athletes who are eligible for the NBA
draft after just 1 year of college, the idea that these student-athletes do not take academic
seriously is a common belief. Mark credits his college coach for teaching him how to
avoid the “prima donna” mindset and taught him how to use sports as a way to enhance
his future rather than using sports as a path toward entitlement:
[My coach] did a good job of kind of instilling in us that there is life after college,
[that] basketball should be viewed as not a means to an end, but a vehicle to
accelerate your learning and leadership and life experiences so that when you do
get that first job, you’re ready.
When asked about how important his academic success was to his coaches, Malcolm
stated, “I would say a great deal, we had class chats and study hall. If you missed class or
87
certain things you would sit out for the game…it was definitely emphasized across the
board.” These points suggests that having mentors that student-athletes valued within the
athletic realm who could teach the philosophy that there is life after sports, would help to
build their self-motivation for academic success.
Summary
The preceding section illustrates the experiences of the five former SAU men’s
basketball student-athletes and five SAU academic support staff members (both former
and current). The themes uncovered are important in understanding the role of academic
support services and its impact on the degree completion of members of the Division I
men’s basketball program. The support structure provided to all students at SAU plus the
additional layer of the athletic academic advisor for student-athletes appeared to provide
a significant amount of academic support to ensure that students are given appropriate
resources to meet their academic needs.
The relationship between the university advisors, faculty advisors, and athletic
academic advisors was viewed by staff participants as one that was collaborative in the
best interest of the students. All of the student-athlete participants acknowledged that
they utilized academic support in one way or another during their 4-5 years at SAU.
Though the majority did not outwardly attribute the academic support services to their
degree completion success, they did suggest that the support services may have indirectly
affected their academic careers in at least one way. It also did not appear that the student-
athletes knew the entire role that many of their advisors played in their student-athlete
experience as a whole; had they known this, it may have changed their outlook on the
role these individuals played in their overall experience. Lastly, self-motivation appeared
88
to be a key factor in enhancing student-athlete persistence to reach degree completion.
Having athletic mentors who also supported the philosophy that there is life after sports
also seemed to be an influencing factor in the student-athletes’ self-motivation. The next
chapter will discuss the findings as they apply to the research questions of this study and
also provide recommendations for future research.
89
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
This purpose of this study was to understand how academic support services
affected college degree completion for student-athletes who competed in revenue-
generating sports. This qualitative case study focused specifically on investigating one of
the two sports with historically low graduation rates and centered its data collection at
one institution. The study examined academic support factors that influenced student-
athlete degree completion for those in a Division I men’s basketball program. It also
sought to understand student-athlete attrition through the lens of persistence and
departure theory (Tinto, 1988) and identity development theory, which examined the
influence and impact of carrying a dual identity on academic success (Killeya-Jones,
2005).
There were 10 participants in this study, which included academic staff (N = 5)
and former Division I men’s basketball student-athletes (N = 5). Four questions guided
the inquiry in this qualitative case study:
1. What is the role of academic support services in student-athlete degree
completion?
a. How does academic support help student-athletes bridge the scholar
and athlete identities?
b. How are academic support services designed to influence progress
towards degree completion?
c. What are the experiences of student-athletes who use academic
support services to assist in their degree completion?
90
d. How does the academic support staff measure the effectiveness of
services for student-athletes and its impact on degree completion?
Summary of Findings
The data showed that academic support services helped student-athletes develop
in a number of ways.
Athletic Academic Advisors Helped Bridged Student-Athlete Identities
All five of the student-athletes indicated that of the academic support services
provided through SAU, all of them utilized their academic support advisor in athletics at
some point throughout their undergraduate career. The student-athletes viewed this role
as the person to whom they could turn to for help with class advising, time management,
academic monitoring, and help in planning for a timely graduation. The advisor’s job
responsibilities included helping with class scheduling, daily monitoring of their
academic progress, assisting in NCAA initial and continuing eligibility status and
certifications, facilitating communication with professors, and overseeing areas such as
study hall, housing, and even financial aid. The advisor also acted as a liaison between
the university and athletic department and had regular communication with faculty to
check on the student-athletes’ academic progress. A few participants felt that the
advisement minimally affected academic success, but it was certainly not a negative
component. Even those who felt they did not need a lot of support credited the athletic
academic advisor with helping ensure that they were on track and meeting all
requirements to graduate. Two participants attributed the academic advising at SAU as
helping them reach the goal of graduation. With a strong outlook on academics,
91
advisement was key in the academic success of the SAU undergraduate population
whether the student-athlete recognized it or not.
Multiple Academic Support Services Assisted in Degree Completion
The data revealed that SAU offered multiple layers of academic support services,
mainly through their academic advising structure. The athletic department offered
advising specifically for the student-athletes in addition to the university advising
available to all students. Although athletics offered advising within the department, the
relationship between the athletic advisors and the university advisors was collaborative.
Athletics advisors were invited to weekly meetings with the university advisement center
for collaboration purposes, which brought another layer of support and the ability to
collaborate with university advisors in finding the best ways to support their students.
Staff participants believed that having the athletic advisors present at meetings benefited
the overall advisement of student-athletes. The university also assigned a faculty advisor
to each student upon enrollment.
Faculty advising. Faculty advisors offered advisement and support that was
individualized around each student’s academic major. If the student did not have a
declared major, the faculty advisor would offer support regarding the university’s general
curriculum and could potentially change once the student declared his/her area of study.
The purpose of this role was to help advise students in ways that best served their interest
of study and to help them find courses that would enable them to progress efficiently
toward graduation. In order to ensure that students met with their faculty advisors, the
university required that every undergraduate student at SAU participated in a mandatory
advising period. If the student failed to meet with his/her faculty advisor, he/she was
92
placed on a registration hold that prevented him/her from registering for courses for the
upcoming fall. The rule was established so that all students were able to receive a second
layer of advisement (third layer for athletes) that offered some individualized support.
The reason the faculty advisor was so important, particularly once the student was
assigned to his/her major advisor, was because that person could offer specific
department insight.
Although advisor/student relationships varied, some students found that their
faculty advisor was invested in their academic path. Because students were assigned to
their advisor by the university, students did not have a choice in the pairing; therefore,
some could find their advising experience to be unhelpful. The findings showed that
students had the right to request an advisor change, but there were times when students
simply met with their faculty advisor to fulfill the mandatory requirement in order to be
given access to register for classes. At other times, the faculty advising and the academic
advising from athletics conflicted because the faculty advisor was unaware of NCAA
rules and regulations, which was frustrating, particularly for student-athletes who were
trying to seek advice on course planning. Not all faculty advisors were knowledgeable of
NCAA rules as they pertained to student-athlete athletic eligibility, which was dependent
on the amount of degree applicable units that students-athletes passed per quarter. When
faculty were unaware of these rules, they could give advice to student-athletes that was
not in compliance with rules and requirements that kept them eligible for competition.
In contrast, faculty advising had the ability to offer a different perspective on
academic advising. Although student-athletes would tend to rely on their academic
advisor within the athletic department as their primary source of advisement, faculty
93
often saw that student-athletes would benefit from the additional layer of professional or
career advice offered through the mandatory advising period.
In addition to faculty support, the majority of the student-athlete participants
recognized faculty office hours as a resource for additional academic support. When
students struggled academically, advisors encouraged them to meet with the course
professor during their office hours. Faculty members were required to provide office
hour support so students could come by or make appointments for additional help.
Overall, it appeared that the mandatory faculty advising could either positively
influence a student’s academic career or have little to no impact. It did not appear that
the faculty advising negatively affected the student-athletes’ persistence to reach degree
completion. The multiple layers of advising that were available to and required of the
SAU students and particularly the student-athlete population were quite possibly a major
factor in what helped the students of SAU reach graduation. The staff participants felt
that the value of each layer, with an added communication piece, was a big part of the
reason why student-athletes, particularly men’s basketball student-athletes, did not slip
through the cracks and why the graduation rate remained high. The structure of
advisement offered specific monitoring that was individualized for each SAU student.
With the addition of the athletic academic advisor, student-athletes had multiple
resources that kept them on track toward graduation.
Study hall. In addition to advising, all five student-athletes identified study hall
as a support service in which they were required to participate. No participant indicated
that study hall was a support service offered by the university; instead, it was a support
service provided by the academic unit within the athletic department and mandated by the
94
men’s basketball coaching staff. Although it was not a service provided by the
university, it is important to discuss, as all student-athlete participants mentioned their
involvement with it. Four of the five participants stated that during their freshman year,
they were mandated to complete 10 hours in study hall per week until they proved
through their grades that they could handle studying independently. The outlook on
study hall was mixed.
Two of the student-athlete participants viewed the mandatory study hall as
beneficial to their academic career. Both found that study hall allowed them a space to
focus on their academics and viewed study hall as a positive. In contrast, two others
viewed study hall as having little to no impact on their academic career. Instead, they
viewed it as an obligation in which they were forced to participate in that was
unproductive to their studying. One in particular felt that study hall was not only
ineffective but also degrading to him as an adult.
Although the student-athletes in this study expressed mixed feelings on study hall,
the majority of the participants felt that the concept of study hall would be beneficial on
an “as needed” basis. For students who were struggling academically, having mandated
study hall could be beneficial so students were forced to focus on academics. For
students who were capable of studying on their own, study hall felt like a waste of time.
Tutoring. Tutoring services also emerged from the research. SAU offered
undergraduate tutoring through the university’s advisement center that was available free
to all students. Although in the past the athletic department offered tutoring, in recent
years that program was discontinued. The findings showed that tutors were not available
for every subject or every class. If students needed specific tutors, the tutoring center
95
would work to see if a tutor could be identified. If that was not the case, the student was
encouraged to visit the individual department or reach out to the professor during his/her
office hours for assistance.
Three of the five student-athletes, though not mandated by any formal rule or
requirement, chose to utilize tutoring for additional academic support at some point in
their academic career. The participants were able to use the tutoring services to gain
clarity on subjects that gave them difficulties. One was able to work in tutoring sessions
around his class and practice schedules in order to receive additional help in math.
Another found that the tutoring services were most beneficial during basketball season.
When in competition season, he felt that the tutors helped him to stay on top of his
academics. The third explained that he only used tutoring services during his freshman
year. He stated that the tutors helped him integrate into the college academic
environment and assisted him in managing his study habits. Once he was able to
essentially “figure it out,” he no longer felt the need to use them.
However, two other student-athlete participants specified that they did not require
the support of tutoring. When asked why they never sought out tutoring services, one
stated that he was confident in his academic strengths and never felt that he was truly
struggling. For the other, part of the reason why he did not use tutoring services was
because he implied that he didn’t know they existed.
In sum, those that chose to utilize tutoring walked away with a positive
experience and one that was a benefit to their academic path.
Academic probation. The last piece of academic support that was revealed
through the data was the advising that was in place for students who fell under academic
96
probation. When students fell below a 2.00 grade point average, they were placed on
what the university called academic probation. At this stage, students were mandated to
meet with university advisors that would help them get academically healthy again.
Advisors would sit down with students and map out an academic plan with goals and
objectives that the student would be mandated to meet. If the student failed to comply
with these plans and did not meet the established objectives, he/she was subject to
dismissal in the following term. Students who were on probation were required to meet
with their university advisor two to three times during the quarter. While staff
participants identified this service, no former student-athlete participant in this study
mentioned this ever being placed on academic probation.
Formal Measurement of the Effectiveness of Academic Success Did Not Exist
The study found that there was no system in place that measured the effectiveness
of academic support structures, outside of the NCAA GSR and APR scores that are
processed through the athletic department and the NCAA, as discussed in chapter two.
Whereas the GSR scores showed that the graduation rate for the SAU men’s basketball
student-athletes exceeded the national average, this was perhaps a reflection on the
effectiveness of the academic support services offered at this particular institution.
Although there was no system in place that measured the effectiveness of these
support programs at SAU, there was the belief among the participants that SAU met
students’ needs based on the fact that students, particularly those in men’s basketball,
were graduating at a rate that exceeded the national percentage. Staff participants
credited SAU’s academic support in helping meet the needs of student-athletes along
their path toward graduation. Although there was no formal evaluation metric system
97
through SAU, the staff participants believed the men’s basketball student-athletes were
successful because they had additional support from the athletic academic advisor. One
participant believed that men’s basketball student-athletes would fall through the cracks
without the athletic support services. Even though they had a faculty advisor, faculty
office hours, tutoring services, and undergraduate advising, she believes those services
are secondary to the athletic academic support. She credited the athletic advisors with
their willingness to reach out to faculty and to undergraduate advisors to facilitate
discussions on how to best support student-athletes who were struggling.
Historically, the successful graduation rates for SAU men’s basketball student-
athletes have remained high, which may indicate that the support programs offered at
SAU have been effective in helping students progress towards graduation.
Student experience. When asked if they felt the academic support services at
SAU met their individual needs, all five student-athlete participants agreed that they felt
adequately supported. They all agreed that SAU valued academic success and placed a
strong emphasis on the academic culture. The staff echoed this sentiment as well.
Whereas the culture of the athletic department placed an emphasis on winning games, an
equally strong emphasis was placed on the academic success of student-athletes. One
student-athlete participant felt that the university did do a good job of emphasizing
academics.
In addition to the emphasis on academic achievement placed on the student-
athletes by the university and the athletic department, it should be noted that the
participants indicated that the support they received from their coaches also had a
positive impact on their academic success. Whereas all of the participants felt that they
98
were adequately supported through academic support services provided through the
university and athletic department, the majority of the participants also indicated that
their coaches’ support of their academic success also helped meet their needs. Two
participants felt that their academic success did matter to their coaches. One shared that
his coach put an emphasis on academics and held them to the identity of student-athlete,
not athlete-student. Another also agreed that the support from the coaching staff had a
positive impact on his academic career. To the student-athlete participants, having
coaches who cared about their academic careers was helpful. The fact that the coaching
staff valued their team’s academic success allowed the student-athletes to feel a little
more balanced between the two roles.
The academic support staff on the university side did not indicate that they had
much interaction with the athletic coaching staff. As discussed earlier in the chapter, it
appeared that the athletic academic advisor was the linking piece between the university
and athletics. From a university standpoint, the advisors also felt that the coaches
supported the academic success of their student-athletes and not just their athletic skills.
One stated that the academic culture at SAU was strong throughout the entire university.
Discussion
As stated earlier, the purpose of this study was to explore the academic support
structures that affected the Division I men’s basketball student-athletes’ persistence
toward degree completion as the U.S. aimed to boost college degree attainment rates.
The study found that student-athletes were offered academic support services both
through the university and the SAU athletic department. As stated in chapter two, the
NCAA requires all Division I programs to monitor academic progress toward degree
99
completion in order to certify a student-athlete’s eligibility to compete (NCAA, 2013c).
Historically, men’s basketball and football have had lower retention rates than other
sports (NCAA, 2012a), a phenomenon that has garnered significant amounts of attention
and was the reason behind this study.
Special Admits
As discussed in the literature, the NCAA allows colleges and universities to enroll
as special admits, and states in Bylaw 14.1.6.1.1:
a student-athlete may be admitted under a special exception to the institution’s
normal entrance requirements if the discretionary authority of the president or
chancellor (or designated admissions officer or committee) to grant such
exceptions is set forth in an official document published by the university (e.g.,
official catalog) that describes the institution’s admissions requirements. (NCAA,
2013a, p. 149)
Once admitted into universities, all student-athletes are required to maintain their
academic eligibility in order to be able to compete in sport. This means that all student-
athletes have to be equally successful under the academic standards set by the NCAA.
Research has shown that academic support services on college campuses have a positive
influence on student retention and graduation rates (Lotkowski et al., 2004; Ryan, 2004;
Wetzel et al., 1999). Low graduation rates were a reflection of the university’s inability to
meet student needs (Mangold et al., 2003). Gunn and Eddy (1989) paid specific attention
to the effectiveness of support programs offered by colleges and identified student-
athletes as a population with unique needs. If institutions were going to enroll student-
athletes with lower academic profiles and expect them to succeed in the same classes as
their peers, then they had to consider the appropriate support services, adhering to NCAA
bylaws, that would help student-athletes succeed (Gunn & Eddy, 1989; Hollis, 2002;
100
Melendez, 2007). It was important to analyze support structures that were in place for
student-athletes to determine if they had an impact on graduation success.
Student-Athletes and Academic Services
This study found that having an academic advisor available to the student-athletes
within the SAU athletic department was a service that was most utilized and most
beneficial to the participants’ undergraduate experience. Student-athletes utilized the
athletic academic support staff most during their undergraduate careers in comparison to
other academic support services (i.e., study hall, faculty advisor, office hours). Similar to
the findings in the Mangold et al. (2003) study, academic advising seemed to impact
retention. Students were able to meet with their advisor to ensure that they were on the
right path towards graduation. By the same token, the NCAA guidelines also kept the
student-athletes on track toward graduation, as they had to meet continuing eligibility
requirements in order to continue to compete. As for services like study hall, although a
few found the mandated hours helpful in offering them the time and space for homework,
others found that the hours were a waste of time and that the mandated academic support
activities were not tailored toward individual needs.
Based on findings from this study, the following recommendations will support
the academic services provided to student athletes.
Recommendation #1: Support providers should assess the effectiveness of
support services to determine those most useful or helpful, and create or seek out
new avenues for support based on their students’ needs –instead of mandating the
same participation for all students. Support providers should understand the challenges
that each student-athlete may encounter and tailor academic support services to his/her
101
particular needs. For example, some student-athlete participants raised concerns with
services such as study hall. Instead of mandating every student to meet the exact same
academic support expectations, support providers should individualize support practices
based on each student’s needs. This practice will increase motivation, utilize time
efficiently and effectively, and decrease distractions for students who are not in need of a
specific support service.
Another interesting perspective gained through interviews of the former student-
athlete group was their lack of understanding of what job responsibilities were held by
the academic support staff, particularly the athletic academic support staff. Both staff
participants who were former academic support advisors mentioned the additional
responsibilities that were assigned to their job duties, one being monitoring NCAA
eligibility. As discussed in chapter two, NCAA continuing eligibility is a series of
benchmarks that student-athletes must meet in order to remain eligible to complete. The
purpose of NCAA continuing eligibility is to show that student-athletes were progressing
towards their degree in a timely fashion. The findings of this study appeared to indicate
that the majority of the student-athletes viewed their athletic academic advisor as
someone who would “check up” on them and run services like study hall, assist with
class registration advising, and provide them with guidance regarding university entities,
but none of them linked those services to NCAA eligibility. As such, none of the
participants mentioned NCAA eligibility monitoring as part of their college experience.
Recommendation #2: Academic support services staff need to increase the
education of NCAA continuing eligibility rules and graduation requires among the
student-athletes population, so student-athletes can take ownership. Student-
102
athletes should be active participants in understanding the intricacies of NCAA
continuing eligibility, and understanding how athletic advisors develop advisement plans
that keep students in compliance with the rules (while also helping them progress toward
their degree). Instead of viewing their advisor as someone with whom they had to check
in, they might understand that the advisement they offer on a daily basis is more valuable
than they initially realized. The recommendation is to not force student-athletes to praise
their advisors, but if advisors are actively teaching student-athletes about NCAA rules
and eligibility, then this has the ability to increase the value of the advisor among the
student-athlete population.
Recommendation #3: Educate faculty to have a general understanding of
NCAA rules in order to understand the academic requirements student-athletes
must dedicate to graduation plans. Leach and Conners (1984) suggested that the
perception of student-athletes is most negative among university faculty. The researchers
suggested that some faculty held negative feelings toward student-athletes because they
believed athletes to be poor students who valued athletics more than academics (Parsons,
2013). As the research showed, faculty were required to advise students at SAU, and this
included student-athletes. As part of a way to best support student-athletes in their path
towards graduation, faculty advisors should be educated on the NCAA academic
requirements.
NCAA continuing eligibility education for faculty members may help faculty
understand that student-athletes are held to academic standards in order to compete in
sports. This education may help faculty understand the benchmarks that student-athletes
must meet in order to remain eligible. Compliance staff or athletic academic staff can
103
hold education seminars at department meetings to review general continuing eligibility
rules as well as cover athletic participation rules so that faculty can understand the
restrictions placed on athletic participation as well. Schools with similar advisement
structures like SAU, where multiple advisors are associated with each student-athlete,
must ensure that all advisors have a general understanding of NCAA rules in order to
remain aligned when advising students on graduation requirements. This would not only
provide education to faculty on NCAA athletic rules so they might gain richer insight into
collegiate athletics, but this education will also provide any advisor that has the ability to
impact a student-athlete’s graduation plan with a working knowledge of NCAA rules in
order for them to be capable of providing proper advisement. If faculty advisors have no
knowledge of NCAA benchmarks, then the advice they offer may not be in compliance
with NCAA continuing eligibility rules, which can therefore affect athletic eligibility as
well as the rate at which student-athletes graduate.
Recommendation #4: Programming such as orientation and summer bridge
sessions for new student-athletes should be offered on all campuses to assist with
student-athlete integration into college. Melendez (2007), Hollis (2002), Gunn and
Eddy (1989), and Carodine et al. (2001) all found that these types of programs helped
students integrate into the college community, which in turn promoted academic success.
In this study, orientation and summer bridge programs were not referenced, and although
the students at SAU were able to complete college without them, having programs that
prepared the student-athletes for the expectations of college would give them a head start
in understanding the commitment it takes to be both a student and an athlete.
104
Implications
Although not all colleges and universities are organized the same way as SAU,
the recommendations from this study can be applied to any unit that offers services to
student-athletes. Although the findings suggest that the impact of academic support
services on graduation success varies, it now becomes important to determine which
services are the most important. Of the student-athletes interviewed, each valued a
college degree and expected to leave college after graduating. None of the former
student-athletes interviewed had high expectations of leaving college early for
professional careers.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study examined NCAA Division I men’s basketball student-athletes and the
academic services provided to help them reach college graduation. As stated in the
implications, future research should continue to explore the services provided to student-
athletes and expand the research further into larger public institutions. This case study
looked at one specific structure of a small private university. Future research may want
to look at services provided at a larger institution and focus its interviews on former
student-athletes who departed college before reaching degree completion. If future
research can identify institutions with a higher percentage of participants who were not
retained before reaching completion, then being able to examine and compare services at
the different universities may offer more significant insight into what academic services
have the greatest impact on graduation success.
105
Conclusion
This study provided insight into academic support services that affected student-
athlete persistence to reach graduation at a small private institution with a historically
high graduation success rate for those who competed on an NCAA Division I men’s
basketball team. The study provided a unique academic support structure that included
the collaboration between university and athletics. It appears that the institution from this
case study is successful in meeting the needs of the type of student-athlete that is
recruited to compete for the university, but can also make changes to enhance individual
student-athlete experience.
The recommendations from this study were influenced by the findings of this
study, but can be universally instrumental. As academic service units continue to provide
support for students and particularly student-athletes, it is important to continuously
reflect and adjust to meet the evolving needs of the students being supported.
106
REFERENCES
Abrams, J. (2009, October 6). N.B.A. players make their way back to college. New York
Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/06/sports/basketball/06nba.html?_r=1
Aschburner, S. (2011). NBA’s ‘average’ salary--$5.15M—a trendy, touchy subject.
Retrieved from
http://www.nba.com/2011/news/features/steve_aschburner/08/19/average-
salary/index.html
Barrett, P. M. (2014, February 27). In fake classes scandal UNC fails its athletes- and
whistle-blower. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-
02-27/in-fake-classes-scandal-unc-fails-its-athletes-whistle-blower
Bean, J. P., & Metzner, B. S. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate
student attrition. Research in Higher Education, 12, 155-187.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00976194
Bloomberg Business. (2011). The average NFL player. Retrieved from
http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/magazine/content/11_06/b4214058615722.htm
Burke, M. (2012, December 7). Average player salaries in the four major American
sports leagues. Forbes. Retrieved from
http://www.forbes.com/sites/monteburke/2012/12/07/average-player-salaries-in-
the-four-american-sports-leagues/
Carnevale, A., Smith, N., & Strohl, J. (2010). Help wanted: Projections of job and
education requirements through 2018. Washington, DC: Georgetown University
Center on Education and the Workforce.
107
Carodine, K., Almond K. F., & Gratto, K, K. (2001). College student athlete success both
in and out of the classroom. New Directions for Student Services, 93, 19-33.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.2
Cavezza, S. E. (2010). Can I see some ID?: An antitrust analysis of NBA and NFL draft
eligibility rules. University of Denver Sports and Entertainment Law Journal,
9(22).
Center for Institutional Effectiveness. (2014). A fresh look at traditional and
nontraditional undergraduates at KSU. Retrieved from
http://eimirvic.kennesaw.edu/AnalyticStudies/Students_2004_Traditional_Nontra
ditional_Undergraduates.pdf
Christianson, E. (2012). DI men’s basketball, FBS football graduation rates highest ever.
Retrieved from http://www.ncaa.com/news /ncaa/article/2012-10-25/di-mens-
basketball-fbs-football-graduation-rates-highest-ever
College Board Advocacy and Policy Center. (2010). The college completion agenda 2010
progress report. Retrieved from
http://helmut.knaust.info/resource/2010CBAPC.pdf
College Board Advocacy and Policy Center. (2012). The college completion agenda 2012
progress report. Retrieved from
http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/advocacy/cca/12b6368_CCAPr
ogressReport_WR.pdf
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
108
DeBrock, L., Hendricks, W., & Koenker, R. (1996). The economics of persistence:
Graduation rates of athletes as labor market choice. The Journal of Human
Resources, 31(3), 513-539. https://doi.org/10.2307/146263
Eitle, T., & Eitle, D. (2002). Race, cultural capital, and the educational effects of
participation in sports. Sociology Education, 75(2), 123-146.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3090288
Etzel, E. F., Ferrante, A. P., & Pinkney, J. W. (1996). Counseling college student
athletes: Issues and interventions. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information
Technology.
Howard, C. (2014). America’s top colleges 2014. Forbes. Retrieved from
http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinehoward/2014/07/30/americas-top-colleges-
2014/
Fountain, J. F., & Finley, P. S. (2009). Academic majors of upperclassmen football
players in the Atlantic coast conference: An analysis of academic clustering
comparing white and minority players. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate
Athletics, 2, 1-13.
Gerdy, J. R. (1997). Student services for intercollegiate athletes. Phoenix, AZ: Orxy
Press.
Goddard, L. (2012). Texas A & M Corpus Christi’s men’s basketball program faces
postseason ban. Retrieved from http://www.caller.com/news/2012/jun/20/Texas-
m-corpus-christismens-basketball-program.
109
Goldberg, A. D., & Chandler, T. (1995). Sports counseling: Enhancing the development
of the high school student-athlete. Journal of Counseling and Development,
74(10), 1-39. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1995.tb01820.x
Grasgreen, A. (2012). Trade-off in NCAA grad rates. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/26/ncaa-athlete-graduation-rates-
football-and-mens-basketball-down-over-all
Griffin, G. (2007). Should athletes get paid? Detroit, MI: Greenhaven Press.
Gunn, E. L., & Eddy, J. P. (1989). Student services for intercollegiate athletes. College
Student Affairs Journal, 9, 36-44.
Hamachek, D. (1990). Evaluating self-concepts and ego status in Erikson’s last three
psychosocial stages. Journal of Counseling & Development, 68, 677-683.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1990.tb01436.x
Hoberman, J. (2000). The price of black dominance. Society, 37, 49-56.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686175
Hollis, L. P. (2001). Service ace? Which academic services and resources truly benefit
student athletes. Journal of College Student Retention, 3(3), 265-283.
https://doi.org/10.2190/WVUD-RQKX-54M3-MA13
Hood, A., Craig, A., & Ferguson, B. (1992). The impact of athletics, part-time
employment, and other activities on academic achievement. Journal of College
Student Development, 33, 447-453.
Humphreys, D. (2012). What’s wrong with the completion agenda—and what we can do
about it. Liberal Education, 98(1). Retrieved from
http://www.aacu.org/liberaleducation/lewi12/humphreys.cfm
110
Hyatt, R. (2003). Barriers to persistence among African Americans intercollegiate
athletes: A literature review of non-cognitive variables. College Student Journal,
37, 159-275.
Johnson, T. S., & Migliaccio, T. A. (2009). The social construction of athlete: African
American boy’s experience in sport. Journal of Black Studies, 33(2), 98-109.
Killeya-Jones, L. A. (2005). Identity structure, role discrepancy and psychological
adjustment in male college student-athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 28(2),
167-185.
Lang, G., Dunham, R. G., & Alpert, G. P. (1988). Factors related to the academic success
and failure of college football players: The case of the mental dropout. Youth &
Society, 20(1), 209-222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X88020002005
Leach, B., & Conners, B. (1984). Pygmalion on the gridiron: The black student-athlete in
a white university. New Directions for Student Services, 28, 31-49.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.37119842806
Le Crom, C. L., Warren, B. J., Clark, H. T., Marolla, J., & Gerber, P. (2009). Factors
contributing to student-athlete retention. Journal of issues in Intercollegiate
Athletics, 2(1), 14-24.
Leppel, K. (2006). The impact of sport and non-sport activities on college persistence of
freshmen. Journal of College Retention, 7(3-4), 165-188.
Lopez, A. J. (2010). Life after NBA comes sooner than many people think. Retrieved
from http://www.nba.com/nuggets/features/junior_bridgeman_20100610.html
111
Lotkowski, V. A., Robbins, S. B., & Noeth, R. J. (2004). The role of academic and non-
academic factors in improving college retention. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED485476
Lottes, C. (1991). A whole-istic model of counseling student athletes on academic,
athletic and personal-social issues. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information
Technology.
Mangold, W. D., Bean, L., & Adams, D. (2003). The impact of intercollegiate athletics
on graduation rates among major NCAA division I universities: Implications for
college persistence theory and practice. The Journal of Higher Education, 74(5),
540-562. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2003.11778889
Mangold, W. D., Bean, L. G., Adams, D. J., Schwab, W. A., & Lynch, S. M. (2003).
Who goes who stays: An assessment of the effect of a freshman mentoring and
unit registration program on college persistence. Journal of College Student
Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 4(2), 95-122.
https://doi.org/10.2190/CVET-TMDM-CTE4-AFE3
Marsh, H. W., & Kleitman, S. (2002). Extracurricular school activities: The good, the
bad, and the nonlinear. Harvard Educational Review, 72, 464-514.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.72.4.051388703v7v7736
Marx, J., Huffmon, S., & Doyle, A. (2008). The student-athlete model and the
socialization of intercollegiate athletes. The Journal of Sport Psychology, 10(1).
Retrieved from
http://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol10Iss1/StudentAthleteModel.htm
112
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design an interactive approach. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.
Melendez, M. C. (2007). The athletic, academic, and social experiences of intercollegiate
student athletics. College Student Retention, 8(1), 39-55.
https://doi.org/10.2190/8GLY-G974-V7FM-E1YD
Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, P. S., & Kerr, G. (2002). The athletic, academic, and social experiences of
intercollegiate student athletics. Journal of Sport Behavior, 25, 346-368.
National Basketball Players’ Association. (2011). NBA collective bargaining agreement.
Retrieved from http://www.nbpa.com/cba/
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (n.d.a). Division I academic progress rate
(APR). Retrieved from www.ncaa.org/about/resources/research/division-i-
academic-progress- rate-apr
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (n.d.b). Division I progress-toward-degree
requirements. Retrieved from http://www.ncaa.org/about/division-i-progress-
toward-degree-requirements
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (n.d.c). NCAA core values. Retrieved from
http://www.naca.com/about/ncaa-core-values
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (n.d.d). NCAA division I. Retrieved from
http://www.ncaa.com/about?division=d1
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2012a). Academic progress rate. Retrieved
from http://wwwncaa.org/about/resources/research/academic-progress-rate-apr
113
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2012b). Probability of competing in athletics
beyond high school. Retrieved from
http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/research/probability-competing-beyond-
high-school
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2012c). Most division I teams deliver top
grades. Retrieved from http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-
center/news/most -division-i-teams-deliver-top-grades
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2013a). Academic standards. Retrieved from
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public.ncaa/eligibility/becoming+eligible/
academic+standards
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2013b). Trends I graduation success rates and
federal graduation rates at NCAA division I institutions. Retrieved from
http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/GSR%2Band%2BFed%2B2013_Final_0.p
df
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2013c). Remaining eligible. Retrieved from
http://www.ncaastudent.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/Eligibility/Remainin
g+Eligible
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2013d). Student-athlete reinstatement.
Retrieved from
http://www.ncaastudent.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/eliginility/remaining+e
ligible/student+athkete+reinstatenent.
114
National Collegiate Athletics Association. (2014). National and sport-group APR
averages and trends. Retrieved from
http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/CAP_may2014_public-releaseFINAL.pdf
National Collegiate Athletics Association Eligibility Center. (n.d.). Divisions I and II
initial-eligibility requirements. Retrieved from
http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Quick_Reference_Sheet.pdf
National Football League Regional Combines. (n.d.). National football league eligibility
rules. Retrieved from
http://www.nflregionalcombines.com/Docs/Eligibility%20Rules.pdf
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1983). Predicting voluntary freshman-year-
persistence/withdrawal behavior in a residential university: A path analytic
validation of Tinto’s model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 36(4), 400-416.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.75.2.215
Parsons, J. (2013). Student athlete perceptions of academic success and athletic
stereotypes on campus. Journal of Sport Behavior, 36(4), 400-416.
Phillips, M. T. (2009). Un-equal protection: Preferential admissions treatment of student-
athletes. Alabama Law Review, 60, 751-781.
Powers, E. (2007). Academic fraud in collegiate athletics. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved
from http://www/insidehighered.com/news/2007/10/02/fraud.
RAM Financial Group. (n.d.). Athlete services. Retrieved from http://ramfg.com/RAM-
Financial-Group-Solutions-Professional-Athletes-Athletes-Services
Ramirez, G. M. (1997). Supplemental instruction: The long-term impact. Journal of
Developmental Education, 21(1), 2-10.
115
Sack, A., & Stravrowsky, E. (1998). College athletes for hire? The evolution and legacy
of NCAA’s amateur myth. Westpoint, CT: Praeger.
Sandeen, A. (1996). Organization, functions and standards of practice. In S. R. Komives
(Ed.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (435-457). San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Schneider, R. G., Ross, S. A., & Fisher, M. (2010). Academic clustering and major
selection of intercollegiate student-athletes. College Student Journal, 44(1), 64-
70.
Simons, H., Van Rheenen, D., & Covington, M. (1999). Academic motivation and the
student-athlete. Journal of College Student Development, 40(2), 151-162.
Stanford University. (2014). Our selection process. Retrieved from
http://www.admission.stanford.edu/basics/selection/profile.html
Strum, J. E., Feltz, D. L., & Gibson, T. A. (2001). A comparison of athlete and student
identity for division I and division II and division III athletes. Journal of Sport
Behavior, 34(3), 295-306.
Taylor, S., & Bogdan, R. (1984). Introduction to qualitative research methods: The
search for meanings. New York, NY: Wiley.
Thomas, S. L. (200). Ties that bind: A social network approach to understanding student
integration and persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 71, 591-615.
Tinto, V. (1988). Student departure: Reflections on the longitudinal character of student
leaving. The Journal of Higher Education, 59(4), 438-455.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1981920
116
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the cause and cures of student attrition.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Tinto, V. (1997). Classroom as communities: Exploring the educational characteristics of
student persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 68, 599-623.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1997.11779003
United States Census Bureau. (2009). Degree attainment goals per state to reach 2020
college completion goal. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/guid/secletter/110323insert.pdf
University of California, Berkeley. (2014). Freshman admissions profile fall 2014.
Retrieved from
http://www.admissions.universityofcalifornia.edy/campuses/files/freshmen-
profiles/freshman_profile_berkeley.pdf
University of California, Los Angeles. (2014). Profile of admitted freshmen fall 2014.
Retrieved from
http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/prospect/adm_fr/Frosh_Prof04.htm.
U.S. Department of Education. (2011). Meeting the nation’s 2020 goal: State targets for
increasing the number of percentage of college graduates with degrees. Retrieved
from https://www.isac.org/dotAsset/8469ef53-433f-4863-a827-56c131d5f79f.pdf
Washington State University. (n.d.). NCAA compliance. Retrieved from
http://www.athletics.wsu.edu/arc/Handbook/Files/NCAA.pdf
Wetzel, J. N., O’Toole, D., & Peterson, S. (1999). Factors affecting student retention
probabilities: A case study. Journal of Economics and Finance. 23(1), 45-55.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02752686
117
The White House. (2009). Excerpts of the president’s remarks in Warren, Michigan today
and a fact sheet on the American graduation initiative. Retrieved from
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Excerpts-of-the-Presidents-remarks-
in-Warren-Michigan-and-fact-sheet-on-the-American-Graduation-Initiative
Winston, R. B. (1996). Counseling and advising. In S. R. Komives, D. B. Woodward, and
Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (335-360). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
118
APPENDIX A: EMAIL SOLICITATION TO FORMER STUDENT-ATHLETE
Hello,
My name is Dana Kuwahara, and I am a doctoral candidate at the University of Southern
California (USC). I am contacting you in regards to my research study entitled, “The
impact of academic support services on Division I student-athletes’ college degree
completion.” Because of your former participation in men’s basketball, at Saint Andrews
University, you have been identified as a potential study participant.
The purpose of this study is to learn about the impact of academic support services on
student-athlete persistence to reach degree completion. The focus of this study will be
specifically looking at the impact of academic support services on Division I men’s
basketball student-athletes. Approximately 5-7 former student-athletes will be
interviewed for this research study. Your participation is strictly voluntary, and
extremely appreciated.
To determine eligibility to participate, please complete the pre-survey questions. You
can find the link below:
If selected, I will contact you to discuss the process in further detail over the phone.
If you have any questions regarding this study, please contact me at:
dana.kuwahara@gmail.com.
I appreciate your time, consideration, and participation.
Thank you!
Dana S. Kuwahara
U.S.C. Ed.D. Candidate
dmccuske@scu.edu
119
APPENDIX B: ONLINE STUDENT-ATHLETE PARTICIANT SURVEY
1. Did you compete for SAU’s Division I men’s basketball program?
2. How many years did you play intercollegiate basketball?
3. Did you play four or five consecutive years of Division I basketball at SCU?
4. Did you use any academic support services provided through the university or
athletic department?
5. Did you graduate and if yes, what year?
6. What was your major?
7. Did you ever use the academic support services provided through the athletic
department?
8. Did you ever use academic support services provided through the university?
9. Would you be interested in participating in a short, no longer than 60-minute,
interview with the researcher discussing your student-athlete experience with
academic support services? You will be compensated with a $10 gift card.
10. If you are willing to participate in the research study, please provide your
preferred email address and phone number so you can be contacted.
120
APPENDIX C: EMAIL SOLICITATION TO UNIVERISTY ACADEMIC STAFF
Hello,
My name is Dana Kuwahara, and I am a doctoral candidate at the University of Southern
California (USC). I am contacting you in regards to my research study entitled, “The
impact of academic support services on Division I student-athletes’ college degree
completion.” You have been identified as a potential study participant.
The purpose of this study is to learn about the impact of academic support services on
student-athletes and college graduation. I will be specifically looking at academic
support services, offered through both the university and the athletic department to study
its impact on Division I men’s basketball student-athletes. I am looking to interview 5-7
participants who have supported men’s basketball student-athletes academically. The
interview will consist of a series of open ended questions that will ask you to share your
experience with working with this particular population. The interview should last
between 30-60 minutes and is strictly voluntary. If you do not wish to answer any
questions you may choose to at any time. All participants will be given a $10 Amazon
gift card for their participation and time.
If you are willing to participate in this study, please complete the survey found through
the following link:
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at dana.kuwahara@gmail.com.
I will contact all who complete the survey to discuss the potential next steps of the
interview process.
Thank you for your time, consideration, and participation.
Dana S. Kuwahara
U.S.C. Ed.D. Candidate
dana.kuwahara@gmail.com
121
APPENDIX D: ONLINE STAFF PARTICIANT SURVEY
1. Do you or have you academically supported a member of the SAU men’s
basketball team?
2. What is your role is academically supporting these student-athletes?
3. How many years have you served in a role that academically support these
student-athletes?
4. How many of these student-athletes do you/have you supported?
5. Would you be interested in participating in a short, no longer than 60-minute,
interview with the researcher discussing your experience with the academic
support of men’s basketball student-athletes? You will be compensated with a
$10 gift card.
6. If you are willing to participate in the research study, please provide your
preferred email address and phone number so you can be contacted.
122
APPENDIX E: STUDENT-ATHLETE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
Main Research Question:
1.) What is the role of academic support services in student-athlete degree completion?
a) How does academic support help student-athletes bridge the scholar and athlete
identities?
b) How are academic support services designed to influence progress towards degree
completion?
c) What are the experiences of student-athletes who use academic support services
to assist in their degree completion?
d) How does the academic support staff measure the effectiveness of services for
student-athletes and its impact on degree completion?
Background Questions (Identity Development):
1. Tell me the process in which you got involved in men’s basketball? (Background)
Follow up: What age?
2. Explain how you did academically as a kid.?
Follow up: How do you think people viewed you? (Teachers, peers,
family)
Probe: What kind of classes did you take in high school? (AP, honors,
CP, General)?
Probe: Tell me about any academic awards you received growing up and
what they were for.
Follow up: If you did not receive any awards, why do you think this is so?
Follow up: How did this make you feel?
3. Describe your involvement with sports and school prior to entering college.
4. Describe how you viewed yourself as an athlete, prior to entering college.
Probe: What influenced the way you viewed yourself?
5. What type of athletic awards did you receive growing up?
Follow up: If so, what were they? If not, why do you think you never
received any?
Follow up: How did this make you feel?
6. What is your personal definition of a “Student-Athlete”?
Probe: Did you ever struggle with being a student-athlete?
Probe: To what degree do you identify with one identity more than the
other?
Follow up: Why or why not?
7. Tell me about any pressures you felt to succeed in academics and by whom.
8. Tell me about any pressures you felt to succeed in athletics and by whom.
9. At what age did you imagine you would become a collegiate athlete?
Follow up: What gave you that impression?
10. Describe how your parents felt about you potentially playing at the college level.
11. When did you decide you would play your sport in college?
12. What factors played a role in why you chose to attend Saint Andrews University?
Follow up: What was most attractive about the University?
123
Probe: Describe the role athletics played in your decision to attend SAU.
Probe: Describe the role academics played in your decision to attend SAU.
13. How did you and your family feel about you attending SAU?
Initial College Experience (Freshman Year Only):
14. Describe your first quarter on campus.
Probe: How did you feel about the class rigor?
Probe: How did you feel about participation in sport?
15. Did your academic success matter to your coaches?
Probe: Tell me how you knew that.
16. Describe the amount of pressure you felt to perform in the classroom and on the
field/court and by whom.
17. What type of academic support services were required to participate in?
18. What type of academic support did you utilize during your first year?
19. Do you feel that any of the academic services provided to you in your first year
made an impact on how you adjusted to the academic expectations of SAU?
Probe: Describe these services and explain how they impacted you.
20. What type if services helped incoming freshmen find an academic balance at
SAU?
21. Please explain how successful you were academically during your first year in
college?
Continued College Experience (After Freshman Year)
22. What was your major?
Probe: How did you decide on this major?
23. Please describe your aspirations during this time.
Probe: How did you come to aspire to reach this career goal?
24. Did you plan to graduate before you enter into a professional working or
professional career?
25. What resources from your undergraduate experience as a student-athlete do you
attribute to the goal of earning a college degree?
26. What resources gained through any academic support services have helped you
persist toward reaching your degree?
Follow up: What was it about these services made such a strong impact?
27. What support services that you did not utilize but you wish you had?
Follow up: Why didn’t you use these services?
28. Describe any support services, good or bad, which made an impact on your
academic success throughout your entire undergraduate career.
29. What role did academic services play in your academic success?
Probe: Did academic services open you up to other entities on the college
campus?
Follow up: If so, what were they and what did you use them for?
Follow up: If not, do you wish they had, and what would they be?
Probe: What role did your family play in your academic success?
30. Describe the role your coaches played in your academic success?
124
31. Describe the role athletics play on your academic success?
32. Why do you think some student-athletes do not complete college degrees?
Probe: What might help them reach college completion?
33. Please describe any impactful moments you experienced while using support
services at SAU; these can be good or bad.
34. Explain how academic support services provided to student-athletes at SAU did or
did not meet your needs as a student-athlete?
35. With men’s basketball student-athletes having historically low graduation rates (in
comparison to other student-athletes) and you being a part of that population that
has reached degree completion, what do you attribute to the reason as to why this
population struggles to graduate and what do you attribute to reason why you did?
36. Describe how your peers may or may not have impacted your college academic
experience.
37. Describe how your peers may or may not have impacted your college athletic
experience.
Probe: What other factors played a role in your academic experience and
athletic experience?
38. Do you have anything else you would like to add before we conclude this
interview?
125
APPENDIX F: ACADEMIC SUPPORT STAFF INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Main Research Question:
1.) What is the role of academic support services on student-athlete degree completion?
a) How does academic support help student-athletes bridge the scholar and athlete
identities?
b) How are academic support services designed to influence progress towards degree
completion?
c) What are the experiences of student-athletes who use academic support services
to assist in their degree completion?
d) How does the academic support staff measure the effectiveness of services for
student-athletes and their impact on degree completion?
Background:
1. What is/was your current title?
2. Please describe your job responsibilities.
3. How long have you/ did you work at SAU?
4. Is this the first university in which you have worked in academic support
services?
Follow up: If not, how do the services here at SAU compare to those at
other campuses you have been a part of?
5. Describe the athletic culture here at SAU as the way you view it.
6. Describe the overall academic culture of SAU as the way you view it.
7. Describe the academic culture of the men’s basketball team.
Probe: Please explain the role of the men’s coaching staff in student-
athletes academic progress? Please explain.
8. How much emphasis does the university, the department, and the student-athlete
population place on athletic achievements?
Probe: What about academic achievements of student-athletes?
Student-Athlete
9. To what extent do you feel that student-athletes are more concerned with being an
athlete or an academic student?
Follow up: Why does one identity overshadow the other?
10. How would you describe the student-athletes enthusiasm towards academic
support services?
11. What specific structures are in place that require student-athletes to use academic
support services?
12. How long do student-athletes typically utilize academic support services?
13. Please describe types of academic support services that are provided to the
student-athletes that you feel make the most impact on their academic success
here at SAU.
Academic Support Services
126
14. How does the academic department promote academic success among the
student-athlete population?
15. How do you feel the athlete department does in terms of meeting academic needs
of student-athletes?
16. How does the department function?
Probe: How do student-athletes utilize the support services?
17. Describe what it takes for a student-athlete to be academically successful here at
SAU.
18. How do you measure the impact of the academic support services, provided here
at SAU on student-athlete progress to degree completion?
19. In your opinion, what are important factors that impact student-athlete academic
persistence?
Staff Role
20. What services do you provide that impact student-athlete persistence to reach
degree completion?
21. Describe a time when you felt your services created a direct impact in a student-
athlete’s academic path?
22. What are the biggest factors that impact the persistence to reach college
completion for the population of the student-athletes that you work with?
23. What types of things does the department do to increase student-athlete
persistence to reach degree completion?
Probe: What would additional services look like?
24. Why do you think there have been academic scandals at other universities?
Probe: How does this department avoid these types of scandals?
25. How do you think student-athletes academic progress, from the population that
you work with, compares to others at similar universities?
Probe: What other support services at other institutions have you heard of
that you would want to try here at SAU?
Follow up: Please describe these services and why you think they would
be beneficial.
127
APPENDIX G: INFORMATION SHEET
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089-4038
INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
TITLE: STUDENT-ATHLETE PERSISTENCE TO DEGREE COMPLETION
You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Dana Kuwahara under the
supervision of Dr. Tracy Tambascia at the University of Southern California. You are
eligible to participate if you were a former Division I men’s basketball student-athlete
and college graduate from Saint Andrews University or are a university employee whose
work provides academic support to student-athletes on the university’s men’s basketball
team. You must be aged 18 and up to participate. Research studies include only people
who voluntarily choose to take part. This document explains information about this
study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to you.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to assess and learn more about the contributing factors that
lead to student-athletes (who participate in Division I men’s basketball) persistence in
higher education, with specific attention to the potential role of academic support services
offered through both the athletic department and the university.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
Student-Athletes: If you agree to participate, you will be asked to fill out an online pre-
survey to ensure you are eligible. If you are selected, you will be asked to participate in a
one-on-one interview with the researcher.
The interview is expected to last 30-60 minutes and will be audio-recorded with your
consent. It will take place either in-person or online, at a location and time of your
convenience.
Questions will focus on academic support services, paying special attention to support
that helps you successfully complete college. You do not have to answer any questions
you do not want to. If you do not want to be taped for purposes of the interview,
handwritten notes will be taken.
Academic Support Staff of the Athletic Department and of the University: If you agree to
take part in this study, you will be asked to participate in a 30-60 minute audio recorded
128
interview at a location and time of your convenience on campus. Questions will be
focused on academic support services, paying special attention to support that helps
student-athletes successfully complete college. You do not have to answer any questions
you don’t want to; if you don’t want to be taped, handwritten notes will be taken.
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
Former Student-Athletes: You will receive $10 gift card for your participation in the
interview. You must complete the entire interview receive compensation, though you
don’t have to answer individual questions during the interview that make you
uncomfortable.
Academic Services Staff: You will not be compensated for your participation in this
study.
ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
Your alternative is to not participate. Your relationship with your employer, university,
or academic services program will not be affected whether or not you participate in this
study.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain
confidential. Your responses will be coded with a false name (pseudonym) and
maintained separately. The audio-tapes will be destroyed once they have been
transcribed.
The data will be stored on a password protected computer. Identifiers will be destroyed
at the completion of the study. De-identified data will be retained for at least three years
and may be used in future research studies. If you do not want your data used in future
studies, you should not participate.
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human
Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and
monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact
Principal Investigator
Dana S. Kuwahara, M.A. via email at
129
dmccuske@usc.edu or faculty sponsor, Dr. Tracy Tambascia at tpoon@rossier.usc.edu
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research
participant or the research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if
you want to talk to someone independent of the research team, please contact the
University Park - IRB, Office of the Vice Provost for Research Advancement, Credit
Union Building, 3720 South Flower Street, CUB # 301, Los Angeles, CA 90089, (213)
821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The gap between NCAA Division I men’s basketball student-athletes and their historically low graduation success rate is relatively unknown. With a small percentage of this population leaving for professional careers, there is a need to understand why men’s basketball has been among the two NCAA sports with the lowest graduation rates. The purpose of this study was to identify ways in which Division I men’s basketball student-athletes utilize academic support services in order to increase persistence to reach degree completion. One university with above average graduation success rates for their men’s basketball program was examined for this qualitative case study. Former Division I men’s basketball student-athletes (N = 5) who reached graduation were interviewed. In addition, academic support staff members (N = 5) who worked with the men’s basketball population at some point in their career were also interviewed. Through a semi-structured interview approach, findings provided insight into academic support services that affected student-athlete persistence to reach graduation. Results showed that the small private institution with a historically high graduation success rate for those who competed on the NCAA Division I men’s basketball team was successful in meeting the needs of student-athletes through three levels of academic advising, which included faculty involvement in advisement and athletics advisors. Coaches’ support of academic success also had a great impact on academic and graduation success as well as tutoring services and student-athlete self-motivation. The study also indicated a need to understand implications and resources at larger universities with exceptionally lower graduation success rates.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Transfer first-generation college students: the role of academic advisors in degree completion
PDF
Latino/a college student-athletes: Influences on recruitment, enrollment and degree completion
PDF
An after thought: support services for distance learners at a post-secondary institution
PDF
Serving those who have served: the role of university career services in student veteran degree completion
PDF
Preparing millennial students for a multigenerational workforce: an innovation study
PDF
Exploring the academic success of black male former student-athletes and their experiences with academic support upon re-entry to college
PDF
Engagement of staff within student-athlete academic services
PDF
A pathway to persistence: perspectives of academic advising and first-generation undergraduate students
PDF
Support service representatives impact on first-generation low-income community college students
PDF
Educational resiliency factors contributing to college success for adolescent mothers
PDF
A case study on readmitted students: the impact of social and academic involvement on degree completion
PDF
Implementing a digital information management system for advising adult students in professional education programs
PDF
Caring for students in crisis: the training and preparation of academic advisors
PDF
Effective services provided to community college student-athletes: a gap analysis
PDF
Persistence interventions for Native Hawaiian students
PDF
A qualitative analysis of student-athletes' engagement in synchronous, virtual learning environments at the secondary level
PDF
Academic dishonesty among international students: Exploring aspects of language and culture
PDF
Impact of academic scholarships on persistence of first-generation low-income students
PDF
Understanding the influences on academic performance of African American students in Black Greek letter organizations
PDF
A comparative case study analysis of academically at risk African American male student athletes
Asset Metadata
Creator
Kuwahara, Dana Seiyoko
(author)
Core Title
The impact of academic support services on Division I student-athletes' college degree completion
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
10/11/2018
Defense Date
03/30/2018
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
academic,academic support,completion,degree,Division I,OAI-PMH Harvest,support services
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Tambascia, Tracy (
committee chair
), Heintz, Katharine (
committee member
), Seli, Helena (
committee member
)
Creator Email
dmccusker@scu.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-89295
Unique identifier
UC11675285
Identifier
etd-KuwaharaDa-6817.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-89295 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-KuwaharaDa-6817.pdf
Dmrecord
89295
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Kuwahara, Dana Seiyoko
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
Tags
academic
academic support
completion
Division I
support services