University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A grounded theory study on the academic and athletic success of female student-athletes at a private, research, Division I university

(USC Thesis Other)

A grounded theory study on the academic and athletic success of female student-athletes at a private, research, Division I university

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content A GROUNDED THEORY STUDY ON THE ACADEMIC AND ATHLETIC
SUCCESS OF FEMALE STUDENT-ATHLETES AT A PRIVATE,
RESEARCH, DIVISION I UNIVERSITY

by

Kristy L. McCray

A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF EDUCATION

August 2007

Copyright 2007 Kristy McCray
ii
Table of Contents

Abstract iv

Chapter 1: Background, Purpose and Overview of the Study 1
Statement of the Problem 2
Purpose and Significance 4
Research Questions and Focus 6

Chapter 2: Literature Review 9
Intercollegiate Athletics and Success 10
Challenges of College Sports 12
Women of Color 14
Relevant Theories 14

Chapter 3: Research Methods 16
Research Framework 16
Methodological Approach: Grounded Theory 18
Description of Site 19
Description of Participants 21
Data Collection and Analysis 26
Limitations 29
Trustworthiness 30

Chapter 4: Findings 32
Motivators 32
Strategies 37
Context 42
Integrated Model for Success 44
Table 1 45

Chapter 5: Conclusion 46
Implications for Practice 46
Motivational Tools 46
Implementing Strategies for Success 47
Contextual Factors 51
Closing 52

References 54
iii
Appendices 57
Appendix A: Recruitment Flier 57
Appendix B: Student-Athlete Information Sheet 58
Appendix C: Interview Protocol 61
iv
Abstract
Motivators, strategies and context for the success of female student-athletes
at a private, research, Division I university were discovered in this grounded theory
study. Using a feminist perspective, interviews were conducted with 14 academically
and athletically successful women, as indicated by a 3.0 or higher grade point
average and an athletic scholarship. Findings suggest that family and previous
academic success can be attributed to high college achievement. Participants were
motivated by an innate drive to succeed, as well as a competitive nature, the desire to
attend graduate school, and the wish to dispel the “dumb jock” stereotype.
Additionally, these women often had clear priorities and used time management
strategies to further their success. Recommendations for athletic personnel and
student affairs practitioners are also discussed.

1
Chapter 1
Background, Purpose and Overview of the Study
Adrianna started swimming at age 2. Her mother and her brothers were also
swimmers, and the children joined a local club team. Eventually, her older brother
began playing water polo for the same club. Adrianna said, “I started playing water
polo when I was 7. Actually, it was with the boys, ‘cause there was no girl’s team.”
Why did she join? Her older brother told her, “You could never play water polo! It’s
not a girl’s sport!” So, she said, “I basically got pissed and was like, ‘Fine! I’m going
to practice!’ And I kept playing, and he quit!” Adrianna is now a member of the
national water polo team, and recently participated in the world championship
tournament in which the United States took home the gold.
Jennifer also began playing water polo because of her older brother; however,
she did it out of admiration, not out of spite:
My older brother joined the swim team, and then I wanted to join
automatically. I had to do everything he did, so I joined the swim team. And
then he started playing water polo when he was in middle school. I, of course,
had to play as well, so I did peewee water polo when I was 9.

When she decided to play water polo at such a young age, there was no girl’s team
for her to join, so she played with the boys. “I was the only girl and it was all boys.
The boys didn’t pass me the ball for a while, until they realized that I was the only
one who could swim,” she said. Now, a year away from her college graduation,
Jennifer is contemplating the idea of playing water polo professionally in Europe,
just like her older brother.
2
The obvious commonality between these two women’s stories is an older
brother who inspired them to participate in athletics. However, these women share
another common thread: the subjugation by boys within their sports at a very early
age. Though much has changed in the 40 years since the women’s rights movement,
female athletes are still facing challenges on their playing fields, courts and
swimming pools. Every woman will have a different motivator and reason to
succeed; this study will try to find their underlying commonalities.
Statement of the Problem
The exclusion of women in the history of American higher education is well-
documented. Though Harvard opened its doors in 1636, the first woman would not
begin college until 1837 at Oberlin College. Even after women got a brief start at
Oberlin, it was nearly 30 more years before women’s colleges were introduced:
Vassar in 1861, Wellesley in 1870, and Smith in 1871 (Rudolph, 1962). While the
number of women in high education has grown considerably in the last 150 years
(approximately 52% of higher education’s student body was female in 1997), only
23% of university and college presidents are now women (Chliwniak, 1997; Hassen,
2007). Looking into intercollegiate athletics, there are even fewer women in the
upper echelons of administration: only 5% of athletic department directors are
women (Lapchick, 2006).
Despite the low percentage of female athletic administrators, the number of
women participating in college sports continues to rise. According to the National
Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) Sports Sponsorship and Participation
3
Report (2002), in 1982, there was an average of 6.1 women’s teams per institution,
compared to an average of 8.7 men’s teams. However, by 2001, the average number
of women’s teams rose to 8, outpacing the men’s average of 7.5. Additionally, more
women are now participating in intercollegiate athletics than men: The NCAA
Gender-Equity Report (2006) indicates that 53.4% of Division I athletes are women.
The report also indicated that across all divisions, women account for 55% of
student-athletes.
This rise in female student-athletes can most likely be attributed to Title IX, a
law enacted in 1972 calling for equal opportunities for all students in any educational
setting or arena. The NCAA has interpreted this to require equal facilities, money
and access to female student-athletes as those granted to their male counterparts.
However, despite success in encouraging more women to be active in college sports,
intercollegiate athletics is still a controversial subject. Between the over-
commercialization of sports teams, the so-called exploitation of student-athletes,
corruption in the recruiting process, and student-athletes being underserved, it seems
that most scholars and practitioners in higher education focus on the negative aspects
of college sports (Duderstadt, 2000; Sperber, 2000; Zimbalist, 1999). The NCAA
governs intercollegiate sports, acting as a regulator for issues ranging from
amateurism to practice hours. Despite the NCAA’s efforts to keep corruption out of
college athletics, many people only notice the low graduation rates of student-
athletes in revenue-generating sports; the sub-par academic standards; the admission
4
of academically unprepared, but physically capable, student-athletes (Duderstadt,
2000; Sperber, 2000; Zimbalist, 1999).
Given this deficit perspective, it is time to draw some attention away from the
negatives of college sports. My study will focus on the student-athletes who excel
both on the field and in the classroom, underscoring the positive aspects of
participating in college sports and challenging the perceptions of the “dumb jock”
stereotype. By engaging in grounded theory, I discovered that the motivators and
strategies used by successful female student-athletes are often formed before their
college years begin, but there are still ways in which college administrators can
contribute to their success. This study would prove valuable to those studying higher
education and student affairs, especially those with an interest in student-athletes.
This year marks the 35
th
anniversary of Title IX, and while the numbers of women in
college athletics increased in the last three decades, institutions need to find ways to
ensure their continued successes, both in the classroom and on the playing field.
Purpose and Significance
The purpose of this study is to use grounded theory to generate an
explanatory model for the success of female student-athletes at a large, private,
research university in the West, an NCAA Division I school with a focus on men’s
football. There is a void in the commentary and research regarding the success of
female student-athletes. Most research on female student-athletes relates to Title IX,
in regards to the growth in numbers of women participating in college sports
(Person, Benson-Quaziena, & Rogers, 2001), yet there is no existing literature on
5
either the athletic or academic success of female student-athletes. This lack of
research on female student-athletes is particularly surprising given their rising
numbers in college sports. More women are participating in college sports, yet the
literature still focuses on men participating in revenue-generating sports, such as
football and men’s basketball. There is some research on the success of male
student-athletes (Martin & Harris, 2006), and further research on high-achieving men
is also a laudable endeavor. However, given the higher number of women
participating in college sports and the history of exclusion and marginality of
women, it is now time to address the inequities in the amount of research on female
student-athletes.
Doing grounded theory research on female student-athletes is useful and
provides a vehicle to learn the experiences of women. While this research is not
necessarily generalizable, it can be used as a point of reference. For example, other
large, Division I universities with a focus on men’s football might have women in
similar situations. It is important to be mindful that this research is not comparable to
that conducted at a Division III school that does not give scholarships, nor would it
be appropriate to compare findings to a Division I school that does not focus heavily
on men’s football. Additionally, conducting grounded theory research will provide a
theory that, hopefully, will apply to everyday life. Why are these women successful
academically and athletically? What tools and strategies are they using to maintain
success? Learning the answers to these questions could guide policy changes or
facility upgrades. An explanatory model charting the success of female-student
6
athletes may be used by student affairs practitioners to help those student-athletes
who are not as accomplished, as well as provide a further boost to those performing
well.
Research Questions and Focus
As my thesis was conducted using a grounded theory approach, I hoped to
find causal connections between these women and their success. Thus, my
overarching research question was: What makes female student-athletes successful in
a football-focused athletic department at a Division I university? More specific
questions included:
What do female student-athletes perceive as the key to their success?
What is the coach’s and/or team’s role in the success of female student-
athletes?
What influence does family background and previous education have on the
success of female student-athletes?
What are the strategies that female student-athletes use for maintaining both
academic and athletic success?
It is necessary to define terms of the study, such as “successful” and
“football-focused.” For this research project, “successful” is a combination of
academic and athletic achievement. Academic success is a 3.0 or higher GPA after
four or more semesters (junior class standing). I chose junior class standing because
it indicates longevity in success. Athletic success will be determined by
scholarship—only the best on the team will be rewarded, so all of my participants
7
will be receiving some form of athletic aid. Athletic aid could be a full scholarship—
tuition, room and board, books and fees. It could also be partial aid, such as just
tuition, or just room and board. Per NCAA regulations, many women’s teams are
considered “equivalency” sports—meaning that each team is given a set number of
scholarships, but they can be divided among players. This means that some girls will
get tuition, some will get books, some will get room and board, etc. “Head count”
sports are sports in which a full scholarship must go to an individual—room and
board, tuition, and books are all given to one woman, not divided between two or
more players. This is done because it utilizes the scholarship money given to a sport
in the most efficient way, attracting two or three women with partial scholarship,
instead of just one woman with a full scholarship. At my research site, the head
count women’s sports are volleyball, tennis and basketball. For this project, I want to
include women who receive any type of aid because some play for equivalency
sports, which rarely grant full scholarships to their student-athletes.
The institution under study could be defined as football-focused. It is a
participant in the Bowl Championship Series (BCS), a national organization devoted
to determining a football champion each year. The BCS arranges for the top teams in
NCAA conferences to participate in nationally-televised bowl games, as well as
crowning the national champion each year. At this research institution, the athletic
department’s budget is $65 million; football uses nearly 63% of the men’s budget,
and more football players receive scholarships than any other sports team (athletic
department personnel, December 12, 2006). Essentially, a football-focused
8
institution participates in the BCS and uses a large percentage of its budget on the
men’s football program.
In sum, this study attempts to determine the reasons why and how female
student-athletes succeed both academically and athletically at a football-focused,
Division I research university. By employing qualitative methods rooted in a
feminist perspective, I determine the motivators, strategies and context for successful
women in college sports.
9
Chapter 2
Literature Review
Before focusing specifically on female student-athletes at Division I
universities, it is important to be familiar with the literature and research regarding
women in higher education. From a statistical viewpoint, women have made greater
strides as students than as administrators. As previously noted, women account for
more than half of the student body at higher education institutions, though they are
presidents and administrators in smaller percentages (Chliwniak, 1997; Hassen,
2007; Lapchick, 2006). Further research indicates that historical accounts of higher
education lack information on women, and mainly focus on men at American
universities and colleges (Schwartz, 1997). This is due to the fact that, until the last
two decades, the history of higher education was written by men, and excluded
women and their roles as students, faculty members, deans, presidents and other
administrators (Clifford, 1995). More recent research, however, has begun to focus
on women in higher education, as students, staff and faculty (Bach & Perrucci, 1984;
Clifford, 1995; Graham, 1978); in terms of gender equality (Gordon, 1990; Kilson,
1976); women’s access (Moore, 1987; Sutherland, 1988), and as minorities (Hall
Mosley, 1980; Herrera Escobedo, 1980)
Despite this surge in literature on female students and administrators, there is
still a lack of research on female student-athletes, particularly those who are
academically and athletically successful. As previously noted, most of the research
about female student-athletes relates to Title IX (Person, Benson-Quaziena, &
10
Rogers, 2001); it focuses on the number of women participating, but not how or why
they do it. Thus, the remaining literature on intercollegiate athletics can be placed
into two broad categories: the positive outcomes and associations, and the
shortcomings and problems with college sports. I have reviewed the literature on
intercollegiate athletics, only to discover that a large majority of research on student-
athletes focuses mainly on men’s basketball and football. These two revenue-
generating sports appear to have the most problems, and seem to have the most
under-achieving students. Thus, when literature discusses negative aspects of college
sports, it is most frequently in reference to men’s basketball and football. The
remaining literature on non-revenue-generating sports, however, focuses on the fact
that they are not commercialized—therefore implying that these sports do not have
problems (Duderstadt, 2000; Sperber, 2000; Zimbalist, 1999). While many student-
athletes in these sports are performing exceptionally well academically, a full picture
should be presented of all student-athletes’ lives, specifically high-achieving female
student-athletes at a Division I institution.
Intercollegiate Athletics and Success
There is brief mention of how student-athletes’ participation in athletics can
help their academic lives. Rotella (1998) discusses the idea of a competition theory:
the idea that competition on the playing field translates into competition in the
classroom. Student-athletes who are extremely good at their sport will often do
extremely well in the classroom, as if they simply cannot do a poor job at anything
they seek to accomplish. Additionally, there is a link between athletic competition
11
and persistence. Watt and Moore (2001) note that “playing a sport helps some
athletes stay alert and that that focus carries over into academic life” (p. 11).
Zimbalist (1999) suggests why some student-athletes do better than others:
“A higher proportion of big-time athletes don’t attend college for either an education
or a degree, but to take advantage of the only viable route to professional basketball
and football” (p. 39). This suggests that basketball and football players are only in
college en route to the professional leagues, and that all other student-athletes truly
want an education while they are participating in their sport, thus trying harder and
putting more effort into their academics. King and Springwood (2001) acknowledge
that student-athletes lose out on a valuable academic opportunity by using their
college years to bide time until they can “go pro.” However, those student-athletes
who are doing well academically and athletically, keeping both areas balanced and in
perspective, are receiving the best deal. (This literature does present a case for
studying successful student-athletes in men’s basketball and football; while it is
important to note that this would be a worthy research endeavor, it is not what I have
chosen at this time.)
While most research on men’s basketball and football is presented from a
deficit perspective, Martin and Harris (2006) examine the masculine identities
expressed by African American men in Division I sports. This group of student-
athletes, while small in number, excelled in academics as well as athletics, and had
positive attitudes toward gender and masculinity. Zimbalist (1999) also suggests that
some student-athletes do better and benefit more from their education because they
12
are “well-qualified students upon entering college” (p. 52). Zimbalist presents
another perspective: Since most student-athletes have higher graduation rates and
GPAs than their non-athlete counterparts, there is no need to focus on them, as they
are obviously doing well enough. Again, when these situations are noted, authors
will mention that student-athletes in “the two big-time sports do considerably worse”
(Zimbalist, 1999, p. 39), and continue to address the revenue sports. This now leads
to a discussion of the problems and negative aspects of college sports that are
displayed in the leading literature on the subject.
Challenges of College Sports
There are many major challenges facing college athletics, including
commercialization, recruiting scandals, and underserved student-athletes. A way to
overcome these challenges is through sorely-needed reform. This oft-mentioned
issue in the literature usually addresses revenue-generating sports. Gerdy (2002)
notes a loss of perspective when discussing student-athletes and their academics:
“The issue is balance. Somewhere along the line, our cultural consensus regarding
the importance of athletic performance versus intellectual achievement became
grotesquely distorted… our responsibility as faculty members to become involved in
achieving substantial athletics reform is clear” (p. 7).
Another issue facing student-athletes is poor academic preparation. Many
student-athletes experience inadequate primary and secondary schooling. Sellers
(2000) notes that for some student-athletes,
13
Many of their academic problems stem from inferior academic preparation in
the elementary and secondary school systems. This problem is not unique to
the African American student-athlete. It is one that affects most of the
students who are educated in these dilapidated systems. (p. 147)

Most scholars will agree that an academically well-prepared student will perform
better once arriving in college.
Despite the authority of some researchers, their arguments are not entirely
irrefutable. Some of the findings are written in broad, general statements, such as the
fact that most female student-athletes do well, as do most student-athletes in non-
revenue sports. This is made on the assumption that these student-athletes are not
subjected to the commercialization of men’s basketball and football. However, in an
athletics system where a swim coach can make nearly $250,000 a year, one cannot
draw this conclusion. At some schools, particularly Division I institutions, certain
sports like crew or tennis are not exempt from the high-pressure stakes of winning
simply because they do not pack a stadium with 90,000 fans every Saturday
afternoon. Universities still expect excellence and winning in every sport—even
those that do not generate much revenue. However, the strength to this blanket
statement is that most non-revenue-generating sports are not subjected to the
blistering media attention or the pressure to earn money for the school (i.e., through
endorsements and television packages). The desire to win is pure. It is simply a
competitive drive to succeed in what these student-athletes do best: compete
athletically. The most glaring omission is that the literature does not address non-
revenue sports programs when discussing reforms, policies and standards.
14
Women of Color
As previously stated, research on women in college sports is usually in
relation to Title IX. The literature regarding women of color is no different, but more
alarming. According to Gill (2007), the prevalence of African-American women
participating in intercollegiate athletics is merely “an illusion” (p. 1). Though
African-American women’s participation in college sports rose 955% since Title IX
passed, these student-athletes are concentrated in basketball and track. Additionally,
African-American women comprise less than 5% of all NCAA Division I female
student-athletes, and white women outnumber them, 11,692 to 594 (Gill, 2007). Gill
attributes the smaller number of African-American women to:
…the ownership of Title IX by White advocates to the exclusion of Blacks;
the inaction of Black feminists who fail to acknowledge the importance of
sports in the lives of Black girls; the role of poverty in Black female sports
participation; and the staggering amount of investment required to rectify the
situation (2007, p. 1).

The real significance of this data lies in graduation rates. African-American women
who participate in college sports have a graduation rate of 66%, as compared to their
non-athlete counterparts at 50%. There is a need to encourage and support African-
American girls in their athletic endeavors, and help them succeed in college sports.
Relevant Theories
In addition to the research on student-athletes and college sports, there were
two important theories used in this study: stereotype threat and social capital. While
the previously mentioned literature is specific to intercollegiate athletics, these two
theories were found during the data analysis phase of this project. Neither stereotype
15
threat nor social capital focus on student-athletes; however, they both can be applied
to the findings of this study (see Chapter 4). Stereotype threat is “the threat of being
viewed through the lens of a negative stereotype, or the fear of doing something that
would inadvertently confirm that stereotype” (Steele, 1999, p. 46). Stereotype threat
was originally attributed to African American students’ testing abilities, but now can
be applied to nearly any situation where a minority feels threatened by society’s
negative perception of their group. African-American students tested in Steele’s
study were fearful of living up to the negative stereotypes about them. This pressure
to disprove the stereotype actually worked against them, making the students anxious
and nervous during testing; thus, they performed poorly, meeting the negative
expectations placed upon them.
Social capital was first defined by Bourdieu (as cited in Portes, 1998) as “the
aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a
durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual
acquaintance or recognition” (p. 3). Since Bourdieu first introduced the concept,
many studies have produced a link between parental involvement and support and
high educational outcomes, including high GPAs (Portes, 1998). Though social
capital can come in many forms, such as coworkers, mentors, friends, families and
professional networks, the most relevant strand for this study was the focus on
family and parental involvement. Just as with stereotype threat, social capital is not
directly linked to student-athletes in the literature on college sports. However, both
theories play an important role in the findings of this study.
16
Chapter 3
Research Methods
Research Framework
All studies have a foundation in epistemological influences, and this one is no
different. Constructivism is a belief system that views all knowledge as constructed;
as a constructivist, I am “engaging with objects in the world and making sense of
them” (Crotty, 2003, p. 79). Thus, I create the meaning of the experiences for
successful female student-athletes. Many theoretical frameworks support this notion
of constructing meaning, but the most powerful for this study is critical inquiry.
After centuries of research done with a positivistic, absolute right-or-wrong
perspective, critical inquiry provides an opportunity to see the world from a different
point of view. Critical inquiry recognizes that, historically, most research was done
by a privileged, biased part of society, and that women, people of color, and the
underprivileged have been excluded. Their views, ideas, thoughts and feelings were
left out, or misinterpreted, by those conducting the research. Thus, there is a need to
study these groups in a new way (Crotty, 2003). While a positivist perspective
assumes that all women will have the same experiences (regardless of race,
background or other factors), and that these experiences can be generalized, a
criticalist perspective allows for differences and does not expect results to be
generalizable. When studying a marginalized person’s experience, criticalism will
better explain her situation fairly than will positivism.
17
There are various paradigms that stem from critical inquiry, including
existentialist feminist theory. According to Crotty (2003), Simone de Beauvoir posits
man as Self, and woman as Other. “The Other being a threat to Self, woman must be
seen as a threat to man and he needs to make her subordinate. Hence the oppression
of women that we find throughout history” (p. 167). Existentialist feminism explains
why men consistently put down and oppress women: they find women a threat to
themselves. Due to this oppression, women “find themselves in a condition of
subjection and dependency” (p. 167). Overcoming this oppression and dependency is
difficult, but de Beauvoir (as cited in Crotty, 2003) believes that women can do this.
Women should be working, studying and theorizing, just as men do, and should not
remain trapped in traditional roles (Crotty, 2003).
Further, it is important to note how epistemology and paradigm influence this
study. Just as in society, where women are often subjected and dependent upon men,
female student-athletes face similar obstacles. At many schools, women’s sports are
dependent upon the revenue generated by men’s basketball or football. Without the
money brought in by these high-profile sports, women’s athletics would suffer, if not
be eliminated. Additionally, it is important to note that football, the main focus at my
research institution and the NCAA, has no female equivalent. Female student-
athletes are expected to take the backseat to this sport (in addition to men’s
basketball) in terms of scholarships and money, media exposure, and participation
numbers. Put simply, female student-athletes are not prioritized the same way as
male student-athletes in revenue-generating sports. Given these issues of dependency
18
and subjectivity, it is only appropriate to do this study on female student-athletes
from a feminist perspective.
Methodological Approach: Grounded Theory
I studied the topic of successful female student-athletes by employing
qualitative research techniques using a grounded theory methodology. According to
Strauss and Corbin (1990), “Qualitative methods can be used to uncover and
understand what lies behind any phenomenon about which little is yet known” (p.
19). As evident from the literature review, there is a dearth of information about
female student-athletes, especially those who are both academically and athletically
successful. Additionally, while quantitative methods are often used to determine
“how many,” qualitative methods are useful for discovering “how.” I am interested
in learning “how” female student-athletes succeed in a male-focused athletic
department.
There are numerous qualitative research methodologies, but grounded theory
is the most relevant for this study for a number of reasons. Creswell explains that
“the intent of a grounded theory study is to generate or discover a theory, an abstract
analytical schema of a phenomenon, that relates to a particular situation” (1998, pp.
55-56). Using this methodology, a researcher will generate, or ground, theory in data
collected from the field, instead of proving an already-existing theory: “One does not
begin with a theory, then prove it. Rather, one begins with an area of study and what
is relevant to that area is allowed to emerge” (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p. 23).
Additionally, the practical nature of grounded theory aligns with constructivism and
19
feminism. A constructivist will “emphasize the instrumental and practical function of
theory construction and knowing” (Schwandt, 1994, p. 125). Feminism is also values
this practicality: According to Lather (1991), research should be useful, both for
those doing the research as well as those being researched. Using grounded theory
will help generate a theory based on women’s perspectives, using female voices, to
provide an explanation for a phenomenon and provide a path for future research
endeavors.
Description of Site
The focus of my study was the female student-athletes at a large, private,
research university in the West. This NCAA Division I institution is the home to
33,000 students, with equal numbers of undergraduate and graduate/professional
students. In addition to offerings in the College of Letters, Arts and Sciences, and the
Graduate School, students can take courses in 17 professional schools.
Undergraduate students can choose from 77 majors and 101 minors. The institution,
founded in 1880, is the oldest private research university in the West, and now has a
budget of $1.8 billion.
The institution’s athletics began with men’s football in 1888. It is now a
participant in the BCS, and football is still the school’s flagship sport. As previously
mentioned in the introduction, football dominates the athletic department’s budget,
but expenditures are not the only indicator of the institution’s football focus. The
sport can also account for the rise in income at this university. As the football team
continued to do well, winning national championship titles in 2003 and 2004, and
20
playing in the title game in 2005, the athletic department’s annual gift income
increased. (Annual gift income is provided through support groups and booster
clubs.) In 2003-2004, the gift income totaled $5,589,000, and nearly doubled to
$10,343,002 in 2005-2006. Money is not the only indicator of excellence; as the
football team continued to perform well, attendance at football games rose, from an
average of 55,000 in 2001 to an average of 91,000 in 2006 (athletic department
personnel, January 26, 2007).
In addition to numbers and statistics, there is also a “culture” at this
institution that revolves around football, including tailgates on Saturday afternoons.
Football jerseys and other men’s athletic apparel are readily available in the
university bookstore, but such a wide array of women’s gear is difficult to find. More
than 90,000 fans will pack the stadium to watch the men play football, but the
women’s volleyball team drew approximately 5,000 people at the first home game in
the school’s brand new athletic arena (Delanian, 2006).
Since then, the school has amassed 19 teams, 10 of which are female. It is
important to note that the athletic teams at this university are highly competitive:
combined, the athletic teams have won more than 100 championship titles. This
excellence does exist solely on the playing field. The athletic department offers a
wide array of services to the student-athletes, including academic services. For this
study, most information came from the athletic department’s academic services unit.
There are many reasons I chose academic services as my research site. It is one of
the premier academic services units in the country for student-athletes. Other
21
comparable Division I institutions include University of Kentucky, Michigan State
University, Louisiana State University and Florida State University. This academic
support center is the biggest in its athletic conference in terms of resources, staff and
money.
The academic support center is located in the basement of the main athletic
building on campus. It employs one director; two associate directors, who also act as
academic advisors; four learning specialists; four additional academic advisors; and
approximately 40 tutors and learning assistants. Academic support offers tutorials
and study hall hours, a computer lab, career services, academic advising, and life
skills programming. Additionally, SAAS houses the office of the student services
coordinator, who maintains records for and disburses money for athletic
scholarships.
Description of Participants
In this section, individual portraits of the participants of the study are
emphasized. The focus of this research was female student-athletes at a large,
private, research university in the West. As previously stated, I limited my
respondents to juniors and seniors with at least a 3.0 GPA who received athletic
scholarships. There were 26 women at this institution that meet this description, and
14 participated in this study. Their GPAs ranged from 3.01 to 3.94. Eleven of the
participants were pursuing multiple programs of study, some combination of double
majors, two degrees, or a major and a minor. They represented 8 of the school’s 10
women’s sports. At the time of the study, eight of the student-athletes were on track
22
to graduate in 4 years, and the other six were expected to graduate in 5 years. To
ensure the participants’ confidentiality, all names have been changed.
Adrianna,a senior majoring in International Relations, hails from Southern
California. She is a member of the United States National Water Polo team, and will
spend at least one year after graduation training full-time with the team in hopes of
competing in the 2008 Olympics. She is in the process of applying to an online
master’s program at another university, which she hopes to complete while working
with the national team. Adrianna plans to attend law school in the fall of 2009 after
completing her career in water polo. Her father, a physical therapist, and her mother,
a speech pathologist, own a rehabilitation company.
Amanda is a junior Environmental Engineer major. She grew up in Nevada,
though both of her parents are from Canada. She comes from a long line of athletes:
her aunts and grandmother all played sports for Canadian national teams, and her
grandfather was a rugby player. One of Amanda’s older brothers is a velodrome
cyclist, and hopes to make the Olympics in 2008. She began swimming
competitively on a year-round team when she was 8 years old.
Amy, who is in her fourth year of school, is enrolled in a dual degree
program in Occupational Therapy. After 5 years, she will receive both her bachelor’s
and master’s degrees. A Southern California native and the valedictorian of her high
school, Amy began playing volleyball in 5
th
grade. The only transfer student in this
study, she originally spent her freshman year at a 4-year college in Northern
23
California. One of her older brothers, as well as both of her parents, attended a local
state university, and she was a ball girl at the school’s volleyball’s games.
Beth,a junior from Southern California, is pursuing a Communication major
as well as a minor in Advertising. A swimmer since the age of 9, she has an older
brother who played college baseball, and a younger brother who swims for his high
school. Beth’s father is a retired commercial pilot, and her mother is an artist. She
has not yet decided if she wants to try getting some work experience directly after
graduation, or go straight into a graduate program.
Callie is a double major in Political Science and International Relations. She
is a senior this year, but plans to stay in school for one additional year to finish both
her majors and continue in her sport. She throws discus for the track team, and
started participating in track events when she was 5 years old. Callie’s grandfather
was an All-American javelin thrower, and both of her parents are lawyers. A native
of both Washington state and Southern California, she is going to attend law school
upon completion of her bachelor’s degree.
Elizabeth,a junior majoring in Art History and minoring in history, hails
from Maryland. She will complete her degree in four years, though she did take a
year off between high school and beginning college to train for the 2004 Olympic
trials in swimming. Her father is a lawyer and her mother teaches high school
English. Elizabeth plans on eventually pursuing a doctorate in Art History, though
she does want to obtain work experience after graduation, but before attending
graduate school.
24
Erin is a senior majoring in Business Administration. She is one of two
international students in the participant pool: though she was born in Romania, her
family immigrated to South Africa when she was 7 years old. An only child, her
parents spent “every last penny at the end of the month” on Erin’s tennis lessons.
Though she would eventually like to attend graduate school, her focus upon
graduation is finding a job in finance. After 4 years with one company, Erin can
obtain a green card. Her parents remain in South Africa, where her father owns two
businesses. Erin’s mother, who worked as an accountant for many years, now helps
her father with his businesses.
Heidi,a senior Kinesiology major, is from “a very small, 99% white middle
class Christian town” in Indiana. She began playing volleyball at age 8, and recently
finished her volleyball career at this institution. After playing there for four years,
she is now using her fifth year of school to focus exclusively on her academics.
Heidi does not have definite plans for the future, but hopes to attend graduate school,
possibly in a Physician’s Assistant program. Her older sister also received a
scholarship to play volleyball, and her younger brother is a volleyball coach. Her
father, who owns a construction company, met her mother in college, where they
both played varsity sports.
Jennifer is a junior water polo player double majoring in communication and
psychology. A native of Southern California, she has attended private schools her
whole life. Her older brother is a professional water polo player in Europe, a career
Jennifer is considering herself. She also wants to attend graduate school at some
25
point in the future. Her mother works at another university in California, and her
father is an engineer.
Jessika,a junior from Northern California, is double majoring in
communication and political science. She began playing volleyball at 10 years old,
and is currently coaching a local teenage volleyball team in her free time. After
graduation, she hopes to attend graduate school, remaining involved in the
management or business aspects of sports, not coaching. Jessika’s parents met in
college; her older sister attends veterinary school; and her younger sister was
recently accepted to a college on the East College.
Karen is pursuing two bachelor’s degrees, one in Business Administration
and the other in Accounting. As a native of Warsaw, Poland, she began rowing when
she was 13. She was recently awarded a post-graduate scholarship of $3,000 from
the university’s athletic conference. It will take Karen five years to complete both of
her degrees, and then her plan is to work for one year before returning to graduate
school—and using that $3,000 scholarship. Karen’s mother, who attended college in
Poland, is an insurance agent.
Kelly,a senior from Southern California, is majoring in Theatre with a minor
in Policy, Planning and Development. She recently obtained her real estate license,
but hopes to pursue acting upon graduating. Kelly began swimming at 8 years old,
and was recruited by many of the top college swimming programs in the country.
Her older sister was also a scholarship recipient for swimming at another university
26
within the athletic conference. Kelly’s mother is a teacher and her father is a district
manager for a large tractor corporation.
Lauren is a senior from Northern California who is earning a major in
Communication and a minor in History. She has already been accepted to at least
two law schools, and is not sure which she will attend after graduation. Lauren,
whose older brother also played soccer, began competing at age 8. She was captain
of the university’s squad her senior year, and was also a member of the Student-
Athlete Advisory Committee, a student government organization in the athletic
department. Lauren’s mother works at a university in Northern California, and her
father is a dentist.
Sara,a senior from Missouri, is majoring in English with a Business minor.
She comes from a very athletic family: her grandfather was a professional basketball
player, her father and older brother both played college football, and her older sister
was a college basketball player. Due to the athletic nature of her family, Sara began
playing basketball as early as she can remember, though her first competitive team
was in 3
rd
grade. Sara recently accepted an offer to attend graduate school at the
institution of this study, focusing on college administration and education. She will
begin that program immediately after finishing her bachelor’s degree. Sara’s father
owns and runs a family company, and her mother is the superintendent of a school
district.

27
Data Collection and Analysis
The methodology of grounded theory uses intense data collection and an
immediate analysis of the data. Therefore, grounded theory data collection should
begin with interviews, followed immediately by transcribing and coding the data.
Once the initial interviews and analysis have occurred, the researcher can use this
information to decide other avenues of data collection (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). I
started by conducting semi-structured interviews with the student-athletes, scheduled
at their convenience. Most interviews took place in a conference room in the
education school or a study room in the athletic department, though one was done
during breakfast at a local eatery (by the student-athlete’s request). Interviews
averaged about 45 minutes, though one did last as long as two hours. Interviews
were tape-recorded with the student-athletes’ permission, and later transcribed.
Handwritten notes were taken during the interview as well. The interview protocol
evolved throughout this study, as ideas, themes and categories emerged. (See
Appendix C.) In addition to interviews, some students were sent emails with follow-
up questions. In some instances, these were questions that were later included in the
interview protocol; in other cases, it was to clarify information or answers given
during the in-person interview.
In conducting a grounded theory study, data analysis and data collection are
not two separate actions, but one intertwined process. Initial data collection, in this
case, interviews, are immediately analyzed for emerging themes and ideas. Once
ideas have begun to surface, the researcher uses these to guide further data
28
collection, and the process continues until the data is saturated—that is, until no new
information can be gleaned from further data collection (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).
The first step in data analysis is creating files and organizing the data. Each
tape-recorded interview was transcribed into Word, leaving large margins for codes
and other notes. Once the data were transcribed, I formed the initial codes by doing
“open coding.” Open coding is done by reading through the text and making notes in
the margins, noting all possible categories of data information. After naming events
and actions, I constantly compared these items that I named in my findings. I used
these comparisons to determine which events, actions, etc. belong with each other in
coding. The second step of data analysis in grounded theory is “axial coding.” I
grouped the previously discovered open codes into conceptual categories. These
categories can reflect similarities in causal condition, context, intervening conditions,
strategies or consequences (Creswell, 1998). After the initial data underwent open
and axial coding, I determined what further data collection should occur. At this
point in the research, I attempted to “saturate” the data field; that is, I engaged in
data collection and analysis to such a point that no new information can create a new
code or category.
At the point of saturation, I engaged in selective coding, which “treats the
various code clusters in a selective fashion, deciding how they relate to each other
and what stories they tell” (Harry, Sturges & Klingner, 2005, p. 5). This allows the
final themes to emerge. In seeking the relationship between the themes, a theory is
29
produced. The final steps in analysis are to develop a paradigm model and present
the theory via a visual model or chart (Creswell, 1998).
Limitations
One limitation of this study is that not a single woman of color is represented
in my participant pool. Of the 26 student-athletes identified as successful,
approximately five are minorities, and none of them were interviewed for, nor
included in, this report. This limitation draws parallels to Gill’s research on the low
number of African-American women participating in college sports (2007). The
unfortunate implication is that women of color are not succeeding athletically and
academically at this institution, but further research and study is needed before
drawing this conclusion.
An additional limitation is the GPA criteria for the participant pool: a 3.0 or
higher GPA is a limited variable for success. This numeric determination of
academic achievement does not necessarily indicate success after college (Pascarella
& Terenzeni, 1991). However, NCAA requirements state that student-athletes must
maintain at least a 2.0 GPA to remain academically eligible to compete, and the
institution profiled in this study requires students to have a 2.0 GPA to graduate.
Given these measures, it was determined that a 3.0 or higher GPA surpasses the bare
minimum student-athletes must do to compete and graduate. Although this study
used a GPA of 3.0 or higher as the definition of academic success, it is important to
note that the numerical value of a student-athlete’s GPA is only one indicator of
achievement. A further limitation is that studies done on this topic using another
30
methodology or paradigm could influence the outcome in different ways than
presented. Every paradigm and every methodology would have its own way for
interpreting the success of female student-athletes; only one way is presented in this
study.
Trustworthiness
Engaging in feminist research inherently means there is no “right” or
“wrong” answer, no one true finding. But one can still expect a level of honesty, of
trustworthiness, in feminist research. Doing grounded theory provides ways to
ensure that the work I am doing is trustworthy and verifiable. According to Creswell
(1998), “verification in grounded theory research is an active part of the process of
research and becomes part of the standards one should use to judge the quality of the
study” (pp. 208-209). This is due to the comparative nature of grounded theory, of
constantly comparing data and creating codes, until the data is saturated. However,
there are still practices of verification that can be upheld beyond the inherent
characteristics of grounded theory.
Creswell (1998) provides eight specific procedures to ensure a trustworthy
study. One is particularly useful in grounded theory: “negative case analysis” (p.
202), or continuously refining the research hypothesis. With grounded theory, the
researcher collects data and immediately analyzes it, and then continues to collect
data based on this analysis. The hypothesis, as well as types of data and how they are
collected, will change as discoveries are made at each step in the process. According
to Creswell (1998), “the researcher revises initial hypotheses until all cases fit,
31
completing this process late in data analysis and eliminating all outliers and
exceptions” (p. 202). Throughout data collection and analysis, I engaged in negative
case analysis, changing and revising the answer to my research question until finally
arriving at the results of this study.
Another method for verification is peer review, which “provides an external
check on the research process” and allows the peer reviewer to act “as a ‘devil’s
advocate,’ an individual who keeps the researcher honest” (Creswell, 1998, p. 202). I
relied upon my thesis committee chair, who works in the athletic department, for this
role. I also shared ideas and information with graduate school peers who have
expertise in both the fields of athletics and higher education administration. Lastly, I
relied up on a faculty member in the school of education for further insight. In
addition to peer review, each participant was allowed to review her interview
transcript and provide additional comments, insight and clarification. Approximately
half of the student-athletes chose to read their transcript and gave helpful feedback.
32
Chapter 4
Findings
During the interviews, some student-athletes were very explicit in what they
think makes them successful. Other themes were gleaned through interpretation
during data analysis. Though many factors contribute to the success of female
student-athletes, three important categories emerged: motivators, strategies and
context. Later, I will discuss how these categories relate to each other in an
integrated model for success.
Motivators
While the student-athletes were motivated by numerous factors, six main
themes emerged to explain the motivation for these student-athletes to do well:
dispelling the “dumb jock” stereotype; an innate drive; a competitive nature;
personal satisfaction; pleasing family; and graduate school aspirations. The first
motivator was dispelling the “dumb jock” stereotype. These women confronted this
stereotype issue in one of two ways. In some instances, the student-athlete’s
motivation to succeed was reactionary, because they have been told (implicitly or
explicitly) that all student-athletes are underachieving students. For example, Karen
told a story about guidance counseling upon first arriving at the university:
So when we come, we freshmen during registration, they ask us,
“What classes do you want to take? What majors are you thinking
of?” So I said, because I got folders from USC with all the schools in
it, I said, “Oh, Marshall School of Business sounds really fun.” And
[the counselor’s] like, “Oh, well, it’s really difficult to get in, maybe
you should think about international relations.” And I was like, “No
no no no no…I will show you that I can do it.”
33
Other student-athletes came to college already aware that the perception of the dumb
jock exists, and they consciously fought it. While they did not have particularly bad
experiences with classmates, faculty, or staff in regards to the stereotype, they knew
it existed and wanted to debunk the stereotype.
This fight against the perception of the dumb jock may be attributed to
“stereotype threat,” which is “the threat of being viewed through the lens of a
negative stereotype, or the fear of doing something that would inadvertently confirm
that stereotype” (Steele, 1999, p. 46). Stereotype threat was originally attributed to
African American students’ testing abilities, but now can be applied to nearly any
situation where a minority feels threatened by society’s negative perception of their
group. It is society’s view of college athletes as dumb jocks that spur these women to
do just as well academically as they do athletically. There is also an interesting
distinction between these student-athletes and the African-American students in
Steele’s original study: the students he tested were fearful of living up to the negative
stereotypes about them. This pressure to disprove the stereotype actually worked
against them, making the students anxious and nervous during testing; thus, they
performed poorly, meeting the negative expectations placed upon them. In my study,
the negative stereotype of “dumb jock” does the opposite for these women: it makes
them work harder to fight against this stereotype.
It is important to note that not all of the participants found the dumb jock
stereotype to be a motivator. Three women stated that they did not experience this
34
stereotype on campus at all, with either their classmates or professors. Amanda, a
woman on the swim team explained it as such: “I don’t feel like people associate
swimming with stuff like that. They always think swimming is the smart sport. They
don’t do that with girls as much as guys, I think. It’s usually the dumb boy jock.”
Kelly even used the dumb jock stereotype to her advantage: during a bout of
“senioritis” she chose to “slack off” on a group project, knowing that her classmates
would expect it from her and chalk it up to the fact that she’s a student-athlete and
could not be counted on to try hard in school.
While combating a stereotype works as a negative motivation, the other five
motivators are much more positive in nature. An additional motivator was an innate
drive to be successful. Many of the other motivators in this study were derived from
stories, anecdotes and other instances of coding, but this inner drive to do well was
one thing that was explicitly stated by many women in direct response to the
question “What drives you to do well (both academically and athletically)?” Callie
explained her inner drive as such:
I’ve never liked getting Bs. I don’t even like getting A minuses. It’s just built
into my brain that I have to get an A. I’ve seen people, they’re just trying to
pass the class, and I don’t understand how that mentally makes sense to them,
because I’m always trying to get an A. I always wanted to do good, and just
get the best grade I could. I don’t like not being able to do something. It’s just
like wanting to be the best, and not settling for anything less than that.

When asked directly what motivates them to do well, many women did not quite
articulate their reasons as an inner drive, but did make statements such as “It’s just
35
something that’s built into me,” or “I don’t know how to not try.” This innate drive
to do well was the student-athletes’ perception of what motivates them.
Another motivator was a competitive nature. These student-athletes regarded
themselves as very competitive, and attributed it as one of the reasons for doing well
both in sport and in school. This theory of competition has been noted in the
literature review as an instance where athletic competition carries over into the
classroom. However, for these women, the two were hand-in-hand: one did not
contribute to the other, they both had equal stature in the student-athletes’ lives.
Many noted that they were simply competitive by nature, and this desire to win crept
into all parts of life. Beth told this story about herself and her teammates:
People get really competitive. Like, the other day, my friends were
over at my house playing Yahtzee. Yahtzee, just a sober game of
Yahtzee. In the middle of the day, I swear, we almost got into a fight,
we almost broke out into a brawl because we’re so competitive, and
it’s just Yahtzee! [We’re] so intense with everything [we] do.

Further, competition was needed for more than just winning in sport or getting a
good grade. Karen mentioned the need to compete for her starting position; not only
did she need to be good enough to beat the opposing team, she needed to be better
than her teammates to ensure her status as a starter. Beth also mentioned her
scholarship as a reason to compete; her scholarship amount was adjusted yearly, and
she competed against her teammates to ensure she would receive a high award every
season. Additionally, Karen noted that earning two bachelor’s degrees, as well as a
master’s degree in the future, will make her “competitive” in the job market. In
36
summary, these student-athletes seem to do well because they were constantly
thinking competitively.
The next two motivators, personal satisfaction and pleasing family, were
often juxtaposed. Many times these two items were mentioned one right after the
other during interviews. Personal satisfaction can be described as doing well simply
for the student-athlete’s happiness. Some answers were specific, such as Elizabeth’s:
“I get a lot of satisfaction out of getting an A on a test, an A on a paper, and winning
a race.” Other student-athletes, like Sara, were proud of their success. They set
standards for themselves, and felt good when they have met these benchmarks.
According to Sara, “It’s almost just pride, it’s like I know where the bar should be if
you’re going to be a well-respected, responsible person. I just need to meet that mark
and I want to be successful.” However, this desire to do well often came from family
values, instilled in the women by their parents. Their personal satisfaction also
comes from making their families proud. Sara also mentioned that, in addition to
doing well for her own benefit, she also wanted her family to be happy. Jennifer
echoed these sentiments by saying,
My parents installed a really good work ethic in me, and they both work
extremely hard. I like to see them proud. It feels good to do well. It sucks to
do badly. I know that sounds very “daddy’s little girl” but it feels good to
make people happy and, also, it feels good for yourself.

It is important to note that this personal satisfaction, as well as pleasing family, was
not limited to just school or sport; both played a factor in the happiness of the
student-athlete and her family.
37
The last motivator that emerged in the interviews was the most academic in
nature: attending graduate school. Adrianna explained the desire to further her
education: “I’ve always wanted to go to law school, and grades are huge, so I just
always made sure I did the schoolwork.” More than half of the student-athletes have
concrete plans to attend graduate school, and one was already in a dual
bachelor’s/master’s degree program. A number of participants have already been
accepted to, or were in the process of applying for, graduate school. A few women
mentioned attending graduate school as an opportunity to continue pursuing their
sport: as a graduate assistant at a college, they could coach or work with an athletic
team, as well as pursuing further education. A few students were not entirely sure
what subject they might study, or when they will do it, but said they wanted some
work experience first. Despite their differences, all of the women knew they wanted
to attend graduate school at some point in the future, and understood that a high GPA
and good grades are essential for this endeavor.
Strategies
These student-athletes had strong motivators for their success, and they also
had particular strategies to ensure their success. These included clear priorities, good
time management skills, a love of learning, and support networks. “Clear priorities”
was a mental strategy of keeping things balanced and in perspective. The participants
learned it was important to have a good balance between school and sport—they
sometimes gave more to one than the other, but usually they balance out well. They
would not sacrifice athletics for academics, or vice versa; sport and school both
38
received equal billing in their lives. Callie learned how to balance the hard way: after
doing very well her first semester in school, her second term was “not so good,” both
athletically and academically, because she partied and lost track of balancing her
priorities. Another student-athlete, Amy, provided this explanation:
I try to keep balance in my life. Like, you have so much schoolwork
and so many exams, but you know what? I don’t care what’s due
Monday, it’s Saturday. I’m taking a break. It’s Saturday night, and
I’m going to go hang out for a little bit. I need to do that.

She followed up with, “I mean, having priorities is really important, I think I keep
my priorities straight, and then I allow for balance.”
Similar to prioritizing was time management. While having clear priorities
was more mental, good time management was about the actual to day-to-day things
these women do. When it comes to time management, the most commonly expressed
notion was that, as a student-athlete, time is so scarce that it must be used wisely.
Playing a varsity sport in college is “easily a full-time job,” according to Amy. So
many hours are put into sport, that the women must focus on school when they are
not playing and practicing. They cited the time constraints that sport places on them
as the key to time management. Their schedules are so busy, that often they only
have time for going to practice and class, eating, sleeping and doing homework.
Some had very structured ways of managing their time, such as creating “to-do” lists,
or being organized with a day planner. Elizabeth explained time management as
such:
I just try to stay on top of things. If I just do the reading, get to bed on time,
and go to practice and not miss workouts so I don’t fall behind in that. I think
39
a lot of it is not falling behind. And I’m pretty good at getting things done
early. Most of my classes are writing papers and things like that, so I find that
if I leave myself enough time to think about it, then it’s a lot easier.

Many women simply knew that they have limited time, so it must always be used
wisely—and thus, they plan their days and weeks accordingly.
In addition to prioritizing and time management, the student-athletes
expressed a genuine interest in learning and school as a reason for doing well. This
surfaced not only in stories, but also in smaller comments and details, such as having
an “amazing professor” or saying “I’ve always liked physics.” Karen, an
international student, took a more difficult level of science because she thought it
would be a good way to expand her vocabulary, as well as a different, more
interesting way to learn English. Callie chose international relations as her major
because she “didn’t like not knowing what’s going on in the world.” A few
participants noted that they performed better in school once they started taking
classes for their majors. Jessika explained that she struggled with her general
education courses, and in her junior year she began taking classes for both of her
majors, communication and political science. At that point, she was “finally getting
classes that I’m actually interested in…and it just comes so easy. When you find
something that you’re interested in and intrigues you, you want to learn the
information.” Many students explained that they try hard in their classes because
they truly love learning, and receiving a good grade is merely a happy byproduct of
learning material that interests them. This genuine interest in what they are studying
40
helps keep these student-athletes focused and engaged in their schoolwork, thus
allowing for higher academic success.
Finally, the most important strategy for the participants’ success was their
support networks. Support networks can be divided into two categories: coaches and
teammates, and family. Only half of the women mentioned having a supportive
coach or assistant coach, but when they did, the coach played a key role in fostering
success. Beth mentioned that her coach promotes a team culture that places value on
high grades. Upon entering school as a freshman, the overall team GPA, highest in
this institution’s athletic department, was touted to incoming student-athletes as a
laudable accomplishment. It was stressed to these women that they are considered
the smartest student-athletes, and they should work to maintain this top GPA title.
Additionally, the coach for this same team recently changed a team academic
banquet from a 3.0 GPA to a 3.1 GPA, encouraging his student-athletes to work that
much harder in school. Callie had a particularly close relationship with her coach
who helped with her overall success, both academically and athletically. She
mentioned that he was “more like a friend” and “he’s really supportive.” Lauren said
her coach was supportive about the women having summer internships and other
jobs to gain experience and further help their chances of getting good jobs after
graduation: “They’re more aware of the fact that when we graduate, we’re not
playing soccer. We need to prepare ourselves for the real world.” Amy was enrolled
in a dual degree program of study that required her to be on the school’s health
science campus, approximately seven miles from the main campus. In a very
41
supportive gesture, the coach changed the team’s practice time last semester,
delaying their meetings by about 15 to 30 minutes to allow this student time to travel
from her classes at the health science campus.
Another strong support system for these student-athletes was their fellow
teammates. Many mentioned that when things get rough, they could turn to a
teammate, who was typically also their best friend and/or roommate. This support
among the team comes from the fact that being a student-athlete “is a unique
experience” and the teammates “understand what it’s like” to practice intensely, and
still have schoolwork and other responsibilities. In addition to relying on their
teammates, these women tended to gravitate even more towards other successful
female student-athletes, those also on their teams with high grades.
Though backing from coaches and teammates was important, support from
the student-athletes’ families appeared to be more crucial. When asked who they rely
on for support, most participants immediately said, “My mom!” Lauren told this
story about her mother’s support:
She knows me, and she went here, she knows the school, she knows
what to say to me when I need to hear it. And also, she’s been so, so
supportive in the best way. She never pushed me, but she never let me
not push myself. She was always in the background, always being
supportive.

In addition to their mothers, these participants were supported by their fathers,
brothers and sisters (particularly older siblings who had already attended college),
aunts and uncles, and grandparents.
42
A common connection in the support from family members included the fact
that most of the student-athletes have parents and older siblings that attended college,
and many parents even received advanced degrees (dentistry, law). Additionally,
their parents and older brothers and sisters played intercollegiate sports during their
college years. The benefits the student-athletes received from their families’ prior
experiences are a form of social capital. First defined by Bourdieu (as cited in Portes,
1998), social capital is “the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are
linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized
relationships of mutual acquaintance or recognition” (p. 3). Since Bourdieu first
introduced the concept, many studies have produced a link between parental
involvement and support and high educational outcomes, including high GPAs
(Portes, 1998). Also, “parental intellectual and other resources contribute to the
forms of family capital useful in facilitating” positive outcomes (Portes, 1998, p. 11).
These women were able to succeed because of the support and trust they received
from their families. Further, having parents and siblings that attended college and
played sports also gave them the social capital needed to navigate the higher
education system, both athletically and academically.
Context
Thus far, categories for success have included motivators and strategies.
However, it is important to note the context in which these themes are occurring.
Context contributes to these student-athletes’ success in providing a backdrop for
their continued excellence. Most of the student-athletes experienced previous
43
academic success and/or self-awareness that played a role in their current
accomplishments.
Many of the student-athletes expressed attending rigorous high schools (both
public and private). There, they took accelerated and Advanced Placement (AP)
courses, or were enrolled in honors programs. Most demonstrated academic success
in high school and even earlier, in junior high and elementary school. A large
majority of the participants made statements such as “I was always a good student”
and “I’ve always kind of been at the top of my class.” This prior academic success
has prepared them for being a good student in college. As previously noted, student-
athletes (as well as other students) are more likely to do better in classes when they
are “well-qualified students upon entering college” (Zimbalist, 1999, p. 52).
These successful student-athletes all had a certain amount of self-awareness
that attributed to their academic success. Lauren repeatedly called herself a “nerd”
but seemed almost happy when she said it—as if she was proud of her ability to do
well in school. Beth said that she hated writing while in high school, but after taking
a few college courses, she became much more “comfortable” with her writing, and
now enjoys it for her major. Karen mentioned always knowing what she wanted to
study, and that she feels “sorry for people who come to college and don’t know what
they want to do.” Additionally, Lauren stressed the importance of knowing how to
study. She said that one reason she did well was that she knew when, where and how
to study, and she knew which tips and strategies work best for her. She even said
some of her teammates did not get higher grades due to a lack of “knowing
44
themselves” and what study techniques worked best for them. Being self-aware of
their academic abilities greatly contributed to the student-athletes’ success in the
classroom.
Integrated Model for Success
These three categories, motivators, strategies and context, can all be
incorporated into a paradigm model to explain the success of student-athletes.
According to Strauss and Corbin (1990), a paradigm model is essential to a good
grounded theory study. In order to create a good paradigm, however, a researcher
must create the “story line” of the study, combining the main themes and categories
into one story. Using this study’s categories, the story line goes as such: When
female student-athletes are motivated by such factors as dispelling the dumb jock
stereotype, an innate drive, a competitive nature, personal satisfaction, pleasing their
families and the desire to attend graduate school, under the conditions of prior
academic success and self-awareness, they then use strategies such as having clear
priorities, time management, a love of learning, and reliance upon support networks
to be both academically and athletically successful. The model for this story line can
be found in Table 1.
45
Table 1: Integrated Model for Success

Motivators
Dispel dumb jock stereotype
Innate/inner drive
Competitive nature
Personal satisfaction
Please family
Attend graduate school
Strategies
Clear priorities
Time management
Love of learning
Support networks
Context
Prior academic success
Self-awareness
Academically and
Athletically Successful
Female Student-Athletes
46
Chapter 5
Conclusion
Implications for Practice
While there are many reasons for successful female student-athletes, this
study focused on the most common and prevalent themes. The context of the
participants’ lives, combined with certain motivators and strategies, fueled the desire
of these women to perform well both on the field and in the classroom. While some
of these findings occur before student-athletes enter college, student affairs
practitioners can still be part of the success equation. Following are the ways in
which student affairs practitioners and athletic personnel (including both
administrators and coaches) can help student-athletes succeed in college.
Motivational Tools
Those working closely with student-athletes can help them reach their full
potential in many ways, particularly by examining what motivates them to succeed.
Most participants in this study cited graduate school as a reason for trying hard and
doing well in school. While many of the women had always known graduate school
was in their futures, some of the student-athletes have recently come to this
realization. Advisors working with student-athletes should make attending graduate
school an option—and a reality—as early as possible in their college years. Many
freshmen entering school are only thinking about the next semester or year, and not
four years down the road. However, the earlier student-athletes begin thinking of
graduate school as an option after graduation, the earlier they will start performing
47
well in class. One way to use graduate school at a motivation for student-athletes is
to use it as tool to continue working with their sport. A few women in this study said
they wanted to attend graduate school so they could continue working as a graduate
assistant or coach with their respective teams and sports. Many student-athletes will
want to find ways to continue working within their sport, and this could be a viable
option for them.
Another motivational tool to use with student-athletes is family satisfaction.
It is important to remember that every student-athlete is an individual, and to find
what works best for motivating her. For those student-athletes who come from strong
family backgrounds, pleasing their families is often a motivator. Similarly, for
student-athletes who come from families without much higher education, it may
motivate them to do well and make their families proud that they are the first ones to
attend college and graduate. It is important for student affairs practitioners and
athletic personnel to truly to get to know each student-athlete under their supervision,
and find what works best for her.
Implementing Strategies for Success
Many participants noted certain strategies and ways for being successful.
Most of these can be emphasized by athletic and student affairs personnel in an effort
to better serve student-athletes. One strategy mentioned by participants was having
clear priorities. Many student-athletes will come to college with their priorities
already set, either by family, personal expectations, or high school experiences.
However, athletic personnel can focus on priorities with student-athletes during
48
important meetings, such as recruitment trips, orientation and registration.
Additionally, student affairs practitioners and athletic administrators must work with
coaches to make sure student-athletes are getting a clear, consistent message in all
facets of their lives. Watt and Moore (2001) also suggest joint faculty/coach
education, so that both parties can understand all of the many demands that are
placed upon student-athletes. Student-athletes can better prioritize athletics and
academics when both parties fully understand each other and the time constraints
placed upon these successful women.
Another strategy used by the women in this study to succeed was time
management. Athletic administrators can help student-athletes gain good time
management skills by offering programs and workshops that emphasize and teach
these skills. One way to do this is to combine prioritizing and time management as a
package deal. Many student-athletes will have difficulty managing their time
appropriately if they do not know which priorities are important. What is ironic
about this situation is that quite a few participants in this study noted that they were
more productive academically when their athletic schedules were more rigorous. The
less “free time” they had, the more likely they were to prioritize and get all of their
schoolwork done. Karen explained it this way:
[Rowing] taught me time management. Before that, you come home at 2, 3
p.m., and you have nothing to do. What do you do? You nap, you watch TV,
you go out and hang out with friends. And then suddenly, it’s 10 p.m. and
you did nothing. When I come home at 7 p.m. from my practice, tired, not
wanting to do anything, the first thing I do after I eat is my homework,
because I know that I don’t have much time, so I have to do it.

49
Many times, being extremely busy helped to keep the women focused. Student
affairs practitioners and athletic personnel should be available to help when the
student-athletes need tips and support on how to effectively manage their demanding
schedules.
In addition to prioritizing and time management, many participants used
strong support networks to help them succeed. They mainly relied on family, but
some also relied on coaches and teammates. Athletic administrators can help ensure
success by working closely with coaches to foster a supportive environment, both on
the field and in study hall. A few women said their coaches expect academic success,
so they know that doing well in school is a priority on their teams. Other women
relied on their coaches for more personal, emotional support. Both cases promote a
supportive arena for these women to succeed athletically and academically, and
student affairs practitioners can team up with athletic personnel to ensure this
happens. It is always important to remind coaches and administrators that everyone
is on the same team.
Another important facet of the participants’ support network was their
parents and families. Backing and assistance came in many forms, such as emotional
or financial. One way many of these women succeeded was through encouragement
and help in attending college. They all had at least one parent who attended college,
and many had older siblings who obtained higher education. Many even had family
members who were recruited to play sports themselves. It is important that student
affairs practitioners and athletic personnel are mindful that not all student-athletes
50
will have this type of advantage and that they come from diverse, varying
backgrounds. Athletic personnel cannot change the type or amount of support
student-athletes are receiving from their families. However, they can try to give
those without this form of social capital opportunities through mentoring and other
life skills programming. Those working in student affairs should keep in mind that
not all student-athletes have help from their families in navigating the college
experience.
The final strategy for success was a genuine interest in learning. While
student affairs practitioners can never force someone to love school, there are two
important ways they can help. Many participants in this study mentioned loving their
majors, including the specific classes taken in their majors. Athletic personnel,
including advisors, can help student-athletes succeed by encouraging them in a
program of study that truly sparks their interest. The student-athletes need to be
happy in what they are studying to perform well, and allowing them to choose their
own classes or majors is one big step in the right direction. A few participants said
they felt pressured into taking easier classes or majors in able to remain academically
eligible. However, in classes they did not care about, they were more likely to settle
for a lower grade because they did not feel personal investment in the course. But
when they chose their courses and took classes that interested them, they wanted to
try harder and do well, not simply for the sake of getting a good grade, but also
because they loved learning the material. Student affairs practitioners and athletic
personnel must always remember that these women are student-athletes.
51
Contextual Factors
One might think that the context of these women’s lives cannot be changed
upon arrival at college. However, there are still important ways in which student
affairs practitioners and athletic personnel can help enhance the contextual factors of
previous academic success and self-awareness. Nearly all the participants in this
study considered themselves at least “good,” if not “great,” students in high school
and earlier. However, a few women mentioned that, despite their prior success in
school, they would not have been admitted to this university without their athleticism
as a deciding factor. While they enjoyed some degree of success in high school, they
felt as though, because they were admitted based on their athletic prowess, they
would have a difficult time in class. After beginning college, however, they realized
that even though they “got in because of sports,” they were able to compete on the
same academic level as their classmates. Student-affairs practitioners and athletic
personnel should keep in mind that while some student-athletes are admitted because
of their sport, there is no reason why they cannot perform well in school. All student-
athletes should be encouraged perform well academically, no matter their prior
background.
The other contextual factor in success was self-awareness. A student affairs
practitioner’s role in this is similar to that of prior academic success. While many
student-athletes will come to college with a high level of self-awareness,
administrators and staff should still continue to foster a positive environment that
encourages all student-athletes to reach their highest potential. Jennifer mentioned
52
that though she does well, many of her teammates have given in to the idea that they
are all a bunch of “dumb athletes” and they do not have to try hard. She said:
I find out with other student-athletes, girls on my team, they don’t have much
faith in their intelligence. There’s a group on Facebook that’s called “I got
into USC because I play sports.” And that might be true! But that doesn’t
mean you can’t do well, and you’re not good enough for this school. Some
people fall into that, or are insecure with their intellect.

This type of insecurity could be reversed if athletic personnel and student affairs
practitioners worked to keep up the confidence levels of student-athletes.
Closing
Intercollegiate athletics is often a controversial subject and most people tend
to focus on the negatives associated with college sports: low graduation rates, high-
salaried coaches, commercialization of teams. However, there are student-athletes
who defy the dumb jock stereotype. These high-achieving female student-athletes
can attribute the success to a number of factors. They tend to come from quality high
schools and enjoyed academic success in high school. They have supportive families
with experience in higher education, as well as college sports. This social capital
helps them navigate their college experiences. These women have learned to balance
their time and priorities, and are motivated by a number of things, including the
desire to attend graduate school. Another important motivator is the effort to defy the
“dumb jock” stereotype that is so pervasive on our college campuses. Combined,
these things contribute to successful female student-athletes at a Division I
university.
53
Based on these findings, it appears that some of the most important causes
and motivation for success occur during high school, or even earlier. Many of our
high-achieving student-athletes are already coming to college prepared with the tools
they need to perform well. Despite this, student affairs practitioners and athletic
administrators must be aware that our institutions can still be a part of the successful
equation. In addition, further research is needed to determine if these characteristics
can be seen in other student-athletes who may not be as successful on the field and in
the classroom. A comparison study between high-achieving and under-performing
student-athletes could determine when, where and how the divide between the
groups occurs.

54
References
1982-2001 NCAA Sports Sponsorship and Participation Report (2002).
http://www.ncaa.org/library/research/participation_rates/1982-2001/121-
132.pdf, Retrieved January 31, 2007.

2003-2004 NCAA Gender-Equity Report (2006).
http://www.ncaa.org/library/research/gender_equity_study/2003-04/2003-
04_gender_equity_report.pdf, Retrieved January 31, 2007.

Bach, R. L. & Perrucci, C. C. (1984). Organization influences on the sex
composition of college and university faculty: A research note. Sociology of
Education, 3(57), pp. 193-198.

Clifford, G. J. (1995). Lonely voyagers: Academic women in coeducational
institutions, 1870-1937. New York: Feminist Press of the City University of
New York.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among
five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Crotty, M. (2003). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in
the research process. London: Sage Publications.

Delanian, A. (2006, October 13). USC and its fans entered the school's new arena
with nothing but excitement but left with little to cheer about. The Daily
Trojan,p.14.
Duderstadt, J. J. (2000). Intercollegiate athletics and the American university: A
college president’s perspective. University of Michigan Press.

Gerdy, J. R. (2002). Athletic victories, educational defeats. Academy Publications.
http://www.aaup.org/publications/Academe/2002/02JF/02jfger.htm,
Retrieved April 25, 2006.

Gill, E. L. (2007). The prevalence of black females in college sports: It’s just an
illusion. Diverse Issues.
http://www.diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_7384.shtml,
Retrieved June 24, 2007.

Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies
for qualitative research. New York: Aldine Publishing Company.
55
Gordon, L. D. (1990). Gender and higher education in the progressive era. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Graham, P. A. (1978). Expansion and exclusion: A history of women in American
higher education. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 3, pp.
759-773.

Hall Mosley, M. (1980). Black women administrators in higher education: An
endangered species. Journal of Black Studies, 3(10), pp. 295-310.

Harry, B., Sturges, K. M., & Klingner, J. K. (2005). Mapping the process: An
exemplar of process and challenge in grounded theory analysis. Educational
Researcher, 2(34), pp. 3-13.

Hassen, P. F. (2007). College presidents aging and holding jobs longer, according to
a new report on the college presidency from the American Council on
Education.
http://www.acenet.edu/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=2
0430&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm, Retrieved May 29, 2007.

Herrera Escobedo, T. (1980). Are Hispanic women in higher education the
nonexistent minority? Educational Researcher, 9(9), pp. 7-12.

Kilson, M. (1976). The status of women in higher education. Signs, 4(1), pp. 935-
942.

King, C. R. & Springwood, C. F. (2001). Beyond the cheers: Race as spectacle in
college sports. New York: State University of New York Press.

Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy with/in the
postmodern. New York: Routledge.

Martin, B. E. & Harris III, F. (2006). Examining productive conceptions of
masculinities: Lessons learned from academically driven African American
male student-athletes. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 3(14), pp. 359-378.\

Moore, K. M. (1987). Women’s access and opportunity in higher education: Toward
the twenty-first century. Comparative Education, 1(23), pp. 23-34.

Pascarella, E., & Terenzini, P. (1991). How college affects students. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.

56
Person, D. R., Benson-Quaziena, M., & Rogers, A. M. (2001) Female student
athletes and student athletes of color. In M. F. Howard-Hamilton and S. K.
Watt (Eds.), Student services for athletes (pp. 55-64). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass Publishers.

Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology.
Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1-24.

Rotella, R. J. (1998). Case studies in sport psychology. Boston: Jones & Bartlett
Publishers, Inc.

Sellers, R. (2000). African American student-athletes: Opportunity or exploitation. In
D. D. Brooks, & R. C. Althouse (Eds.), Racism in college athletics, (pp. 133-
153). Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology, Inc.

Sperber, M. (2000). Beer and circus: How big-time college sports is crippling
undergraduate education. New York: Henry Holt and Company, LLC.

Steele, C. M. (1999, August). Thin ice: “Stereotype threat” and black college
students. Atlantic Monthly, 284, 44-54.

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory
procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Sutherland, M. (1988). Women in higher education: Effects of crises and change.
Higher education, 5(17), pp. 479-490.

Watt, S. K., & Moore, J. L. (2001). Who are student athletes? In M. F. Howard-
Hamilton and S. K. Watt (Eds.), Student services for athletes (pp. 55-64). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Zimbalist, A. (1999). Unpaid professionals: Commercialism and conflict in big-time
college sports. Princeton University Press.
57
Appendix A: Recruitment Flier
Attention USC Female
Student-Athletes!
******************
I’m Kristy McCray, a USC graduate student in education and
I’m working on my thesis. My study is on the SUCCESS of
female student-athletes at USC—what motivates you, who are
your support networks, why are you so successful?

I’d like to ask YOU for your help and participation
because…
You’re a woman!
You have a 3.0+ GPA
You’re a junior or senior
You’re on athletic scholarship

This semester, I’d like for you to participate in a one-hour
individual interview with me. I may also ask to observe you in
practice or competition settings, or while you study.
Additionally, some women will be chosen for a focus group.
Please contact me as soon as possible to set up an interview
and/or focus group. If you have questions or concerns, please
feel free to contact me as well. You can call me at 310-698-
2446 (cell) or email me at klmccray@usc.edu.
*******
Thank you!

(This study will protect your privacy and your information will remain confidential!)
58
Appendix B: Student-Athlete Information Sheet

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education

Response to the interview questions will constitute consent to participate in this research project.
INFORMATION SHEET FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

A Grounded Theory Study on the Success of Female
Student-Athletes
(Student-Athlete Information Sheet)

You are asked to participate in a research study conducted by Kristy McCray, a
master’s degree student from the Rossier School of Education at the University of
Southern California. This research is being done for a master’s thesis. You were
selected as a possible participant in this study because you a female student-athlete
with a GPA of 3.0 and receive athletic scholarship and are age 18 or older. A total of
15 subjects will be selected from USC’s female student-athlete population to
participate. Your participation is voluntary.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
We are asking you to take part in a research study because we are trying to learn
more about how and why female student-athletes succeed at a school with such a
heavy focus on football (men’s sports). Additionally, the number of women
participating in college athletics is growing, and there is a need to discover what
makes them succeed.

PROCEDURES
You will be asked to participate in at least one, one-hour individual interview to be
held at the USC campus. The interview will be audio-taped. You can continue with
your participation should you decline to be audio-taped. Additionally, you may be
asked to take part in a focus group with other USC female student-athletes, which
will occur only one time, and will take no longer than 2 hours, at the USC campus.
You may also be observed during a team practice or study session, at least one time,
and for no longer than one hour. Questions during focus groups and interviews will
be about motivation and success strategies. Your participation will be during the
Spring 2007 semester, and will not go past May 2007. Additional participants in this
study may include your athletic academic advisor and coach(es), and they will be
asked about success and motivation strategies of their top athletes. However, they
will not specifically be asked about you and/or your performance.

59
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
There are no anticipated risks to your participation; you may be inconvenienced from
taking time out of your day to complete the interview or focus group, etc., or you
may feel uncomfortable being observed. Any questions during interviews and focus
groups that make you uncomfortable may be skipped and not answered.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO SUBJECTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
You may not directly benefit from your participation in this research study. As this is
a research study, the benefits are contingent upon the results. However, given the
rising number of women in college athletics, the results of this study may help future
student-athletes, both at USC and other institutions.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will not receive any payment for your participation in this research study.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be
identified with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your
permission or as required by law. The information collected about you will be coded
using a fake name (pseudonym) or initials and numbers, for example abc-123, etc.
The information which has your identifiable information will be kept separately from
the rest of your data.

Only members of the research team will have access to the data associated with this
study. The data will be stored in the investigator’s home in a locked file cabinet and
password-protected computer. The data will be stored for three years after the study
has been completed and then destroyed.
Interviews and focus groups may be audio-taped with your permission. You have the
right to review these audio tapes. No other person besides the researcher will have
access to the audio tapes, or will listen to the audio tapes. You may decline to be
audio taped, and still participate in the study.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no
information will be included that would reveal your identity.

Due to the nature of the focus groups, confidentiality cannot be guaranteed; however
you are asked not to discuss the content of the focus group with your friends, etc.

ALTERNATIVE TO PARICIPATION
The only alternative is to not participate.

60
PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
You can choose whether to be in this study or not. If you volunteer to be in this
study, you may withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind. You may
also refuse to answer any questions you don’t want to answer and still remain in the
study. The investigator may withdraw you from this research if circumstances arise
which warrant doing so.

RIGHTS OF RESEARCH SUBJECTS
You may withdraw your consent at any time and discontinue participation without
penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies because of your
participation in this research study. If you have questions regarding your rights as a
research subject, contact the University Park IRB, Office of the Vice Provost for
Research Advancement, Grace Ford Salvatori Hall, Room 306, Los Angeles, CA
90089-1695, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu.
IDENTIFICATION OF INVESTIGATORS
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact
Kristy McCray, the principal investigator at 310-698-2446 or klmccray@usc.edu.
61
Appendix C: Interview Protocol
1. Briefly, tell me a bit about yourself and your background.
Where are you from?
What is your major, year in school?
What sport/position do you play?
What is your family background?
2. Describe your athletic history.
How, why and when did you begin your sport?
3. Tell me about your academic history.
High school (and earlier).
College/USC history—USC GPA?
4. What are your plans after graduation?
5. Who and/or what do you rely on for support (support networks)?
6. Tell me about what you think drives you.
7. Why do you think you’ve done well at USC?
8. Do you experience a “dumb jock” stereotype on campus—teachers,
classmates, etc.?
9. Any awards or accolades, both academic and athletic?
10. If you had to say which was more important...doing well in your sport, or
doing well in school, which would you choose? Why?
62
11. Are you involved in any extra-curricular activities, like SAAC, a sorority,
campus groups and organizations, volunteer work, a job (including summer
work), internship, etc.?
If you are no longer competing/practicing, and you ARE doing one of
these things...were you able to do it before the end of your sport? Or
have you only picked up this activity since the end of athletics?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Motivators, strategies and context for the success of female student-athletes at a private, research, Division I university were discovered in this grounded theory study. Using a feminist perspective, interviews were conducted with 14 academically and athletically successful women, as indicated by a 3.0 or higher grade point average and an athletic scholarship. Findings suggest that family and previous academic success can be attributed to high college achievement. Participants were motivated by an innate drive to succeed, as well as a competitive nature, the desire to attend graduate school, and the wish to dispel the "dumb jock" stereotype. Additionally, these women often had clear priorities and used time management strategies to further their success. Recommendations for athletic personnel and student affairs practitioners are also discussed.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A grounded theory study on the academic success of undergraduate women in science, engineering, and mathematics fields at a private, research univerisity

PDF

Huddle-up: a phenomenological approach to understanding the impact of intercollegiate athletic participation on the academic socialization of male revenue-generating student-athletes

PDF

A comparative case study analysis of academically at risk African American male student athletes

PDF

Exploring the undergraduate Latina/o experience: a case study of academically successful students at a research institution

PDF

Engagement of staff within student-athlete academic services

PDF

Male student-athlete perceptions of university academic staff expectations: a qualitative analysis of perceptions, value and academic motivation

PDF

Supporting the transition and academic success of transfer students at a large research university

PDF

The impact of learning communities on the retention and academic integration of Latino students at a highly selective private four-year institution

PDF

Academic coaching practices for students with learning disabilities and differences

PDF

An examination of collaboration amongst student affairs and academic affairs professionals in an action research project

PDF

Proposition 209: a case study on the impact of race-based legislation on student affairs at the University of California

PDF

A study of academic success with students of color: what really matters? Lessons from high-performing, high-poverty urban schools

PDF

The impact of academic support services on Division I student-athletes' college degree completion

PDF

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

PDF

The impact of learning communities on the retention and academic integration of African American students at a highly selective four-year private institution

PDF

The academic integration and retention of Latino community college transfer students at a highly selective private four-year institution

PDF

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

PDF

Enrollment and financial aid decisions of first-year students at a private institution

PDF

Finding academic success during political times of uncertainty for undocumented students in California state community colleges

PDF

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

Asset Metadata

Creator McCray, Kristy Lee (author)

Core Title A grounded theory study on the academic and athletic success of female student-athletes at a private, research, Division I university

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Master of Education

Degree Program Postsecondary Administration

Publication Date 07/02/2007

Defense Date 06/15/2007

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

Tag grounded theory,Higher education,intercollegiate athletics,OAI-PMH Harvest,student affairs,successful female student-athletes

Language English

Advisor Martin, Brandon E. (committee chair), Harris, Frank (committee member), Jun, Alexander (committee member)

Creator Email klmccray@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m578

Unique identifier UC1305444

Identifier etd-McCray-20070702 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-506172 (legacy record id),usctheses-m578 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-McCray-20070702.pdf

Dmrecord 506172

Document Type Thesis

Rights McCray, Kristy Lee

Type texts

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

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu