Final Thesis!

I am proud to say my final thesis study for my masters of education is completed! It is titled: "The Student-Athlete Experience at Faith-Based Versus Non Faith-Based Universities: How do student-athletes perceive the strengths and weaknesses of faith-based versus non faith-based universities?" 

If you're interested in reading it, it is attached below. If you are interested in reading it, I welcome any feedback, especially people who work with high school or collegiate student-athletes on a daily basis. Thank you so much and for those of you who read it, I hope you enjoy!

 

 

 

A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Education at Belmont University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Education

By: Linzee Elizabeth Kerce; B.S., Faulkner University, 2014

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The completion of this thesis marks the end of an unbelievable adventure that has provided me an education far beyond the small piece of paper I will receive in a few, short weeks. I would like to thank everyone who had a part in helping me on this journey.

            First, I must thank my family. I seriously have two fantastic parents who have always supported my dreams and desires. They have pushed me to work hard for those dreams and I would never have the courage to take leaps of faith without my entire family’s support.

            Second, I must thank Cameron Newbauer, the head Women’s Basketball coach, for giving me the opportunity to hold the graduate assistant position here at Belmont. This position allowed me to financially be able to achieve my dream of pursuing a Master’s in education and gaining coaching experience along the way.

            To all of those who helped in my research, I cannot thank you enough. Everyone leads such busy lives and it is not every day that I would expect the reaction to the surveys that I received. After sending out the surveys to all of you, I received almost 100% participation in an extremely timely manner. You are all fantastic people, colleagues, and friends and for that I thank you.

            To my Saturday crew, we did it! We survived all of those long Saturday classes when Starbucks was closed and sleep deprivation was immaculate. Thank you for pushing me in this program and for your friendships along the way.

            Finally, I want to thank everyone who doubted me. To everyone who thought I could not do this. To everyone who said coaching full time and striving to achieve a Masters was impossible, thank you for fueling the fire that propelled me to accomplish this wonderful stage in my life.

Table of Contents

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ………………………….………1

            Statement of Problem ……………………………….……1

            Purpose ……………………………………………….……3

            Overview of the Study ……………………………….……4

CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE ………………….…..6         

            Introduction …………………………………………….…..6

            Faith in Athletics & Education …………………….……...11

            Faith-Based vs. Non Faith-Based Universities ………...14

            Summary …………………………………………………...16

CHAPTER III: METHODS ………………………………………..17

            Introduction …………………………………………………17

            Participants …………………………………………………17

            Survey Instrument …………………………………………19

            Data Analysis ………………………………………………20

            Limitations ………………………………………………….23

CHAPTER IV: RESULTS …………………………………………24

            Introduction …………………………………………………24

            Research Questions ………………………………………24

            Demographic Data ……………………………….………..24

            Survey Results …………………………………….……….27

            Background Questions (Student-Athletes) ………….…..27

            Faith-Based University Specific Questions ……….……28

`           Non Faith-Based University Specific Questions ….……30

            University Comparison Questions ………………….……32

            Post-Graduate Questions (Student-Athletes) ……….….35

            Background Questions (Coaches) …………………….…39

            Transition Specific Questions (Coaches)          ………………..39

            Faith-Based University Specific Questions ……………..40

            Non Faith-Based University Specific Questions           ………..42

            Concluding Thoughts ………………………………………43

CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION OF RESULTS …………………….45

            Benefits of Faith-Based Universities ……………………..45

            What’s Next …………………………………………………48

REFERENCES ………………………………………………..……54

APPENDICES ………………………………………………….......58

 

 

 

Abstract

There are several types of universities in the United States of America. A university is defined here as a four-year post-high school institution that furthers an individual’s education in a particular area of study (Hubbard, 1998). Most universities have a variety of athletic programs. High school student-athletes from around the country are being recruited, and trying to decide which university is right for them. This study included the breakdown of the process that high school student-athletes go through in order to choose the right university.

            Although there are many ways to categorize universities in this country, this study explored the difference between faith-based universities and non-faith based universities. This study focused on the perceived benefits of the student-athlete in both types of universities. These benefits include but are not limited to: academic benefits, social benefits, spiritual benefits, and networking benefits.

            Surveys were given that included multiple potential benefits of both types of universities; however they centered mostly on the four categories listed earlier. The pool of people in this study consisted of student-athletes, both current and former, and coaches that have all experienced first-hand both types of universities. Results indicated that student-athletes perceived faith-based universities to have more benefits in the areas of academics, social life, spiritual life, and networking possibilities than non-faith-based universities. These results can help athletic department personnel at all types of institutions better understand what student-athletes need and focus efforts to better meet those needs.

 

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Statement of Problem

At some point, every child is asked the same question: “What do you want to be when you grow up?” That question soon transforms into “What College can help you achieve your goals?” The progression of the question that is asked of every child moves to targeting adults and what they wish to do with the rest of their lives. College is the place where a person figures much of that out. Children who have the dream of playing collegiate sports have to factor many things into this life-altering decision. So, the problem remains: how do you pick the absolute best college or university? What are the qualifications that make a university a good choice in the first place? Especially as a student-athlete, every school that is recruiting you is selling you on all of the best qualities of their university, their brand. Some will say that a small, religious school is the best influence for a young adult and others will argue that a large state university has advantages that make it the perfect choice. How does a person know which one is the best fit for him or her? What types of factors are most important in the process of making this decision? The question guiding this research is “How do student-athletes perceive the benefits of faith based universities versus non-faith based universities?”

Recruitment is a vital part of every collegiate sports program. The strategies coaches and institutions use are endless regarding how to convince the top student-athletes in the country that their university is the best for them. Numerous studies have attempted to determine what factors have the greatest influence on students' college choice. According to Letawsky’s (2003) study summarizing the factors that affect student-athletes college choice, the academic reputation of the institution was more important than tuition level. Sevier (1993) studied college-bound high school juniors and reported that availability of desired major and total cost of attending college were the most important factors. Galotti and Mark (1994) noted that parents and guardians, friends, and guidance center materials were rated as most important in the college search process. Finally, Hu and Hossler (2000) found that students were most influenced by family input and financial considerations.

            So, when a sixteen-year-old student-athlete sits down at the kitchen table with his or her family to decide which college he or she attends, multiple factors are considered. Some high school student-athletes come from low-income homes where family is not necessarily around to help make the decision. For these student-athletes, an athletic scholarship is usually the only way they will have the opportunity to earn a college education. For others, finances have never truly been an issue and the academic settings or social settings are what influences their decision the most. Evidence from Furukawa’s (2011) study finds that the factor of religious belief is becoming more and more of an influencing factor on this decision as well.

When a high school student-athlete is being recruited, they face one of the biggest decisions of their life. When student-athletes are considering between a faith-based institution and one that is not faith-based, what factors enter into their decision?. There are several differences between non-faith based universities and faith-based universities. One of the relevant factors about the two types of universities is the size. Faith-based universities are generally much smaller than non-faith based universities (Furukawa, 2011). Another relevant variable is that the cost of faith-based universities is often much higher than public non faith-based institutions (Anthony, 2001). Because of receiving no funding from the state, tuition and fees are higher to try to keep the growth and expansion of the university moving forward. The overall environment of faith-based universities contrasts greatly with that of a public university, at least partially due to the different rules and regulations in place. Do student-athletes who have experienced both types of institutions perceive that faith-based universities can provide more benefits to a student-athlete than a non-faith based university? Little research exists on this question and thus knowledge will be particularly helpful for athletic department personnel in faith-based institutions as they work to meet the needs of their current student-athletes and work to recruit student-athletes. These potential benefits include, but are not limited to, academic benefits, social benefits, spiritual benefits, and networking benefits.

Purpose

Being a student-athlete for my entire life, and now being a coach where I work with them on a daily basis, my main goal is to create an environment in which my athletes can succeed athletically and personally. I have attended both a private, faith-based institution as well as a public university funded by the state. People who have experienced both types of institutions are in a unique position to assess the perceived relative strengths and weaknesses of faith-based versus non faith-based universities. This study will examine the perceived strengths and weaknesses to enhance understanding about exactly what collegiate student-athletes prefer in one type of university relative to another and why they prefer it. This deeper knowledge can help coaches and other athletic department personnel at faith-based institutions better understand how to connect with prospective student-athletes and better understand how to meet the expectations of the student-athletes who choose to join their programs. My dream is to become a teacher and a coach with the goal of preparing and growing the minds of the next generation to be the best possible leaders for our future. This study will help determine exactly what certain student-athletes prefer about faith-based universities and how it has helped them in their sport, in the classroom, and in life post-graduation.

Overview of the Study

The research methods for this thesis are primarily qualitative. Surveys focus on the potential benefits of faith-based universities in the following four areas: academic, spiritual, social, and networking. The participants in this study consist of a population that has first-hand experience at both a non-faith based university and faith-based university. All student-athletes who participate in this study have attended at least a year in both types of universities. The coaches who participate in this study have coached at least one year in both types of universities. The student-athletes are divided up into two separate pools. One pool is the student-athletes who are still currently in college, while the other group is retired student-athletes who have graduated and moved on from their education. The coaches participating have seen both types of universities in one of two scenarios. They have either coached at both types of universities or some have attended one type as a student-athlete and coached at the other post-graduation. There are seventy-five people in this study: sixty student-athletes and fifteen coaches. The entire pool of subjects consists of connections I have made in my years of being a student-athlete and coach. Overall, the group of student-athletes and coaches participating in this study has personal experience at both faith-based and non faith-based universities. The types of questions in this research are open-ended and created specifically for either the pool of student-athletes or coaches.

 

 

CHAPTER II

Review of Literature

Introduction

            Letawsky (2003) examined the factors that influence how high school students make their college selections. This study explains whether or not the factors that influence the decision of choosing a college is different for student-athletes and those who do not participate in athletics. The study focused on the experiences of 135 first year student-athletes. Surveys were distributed to all first-year student-athletes present at study table meetings. Of the 127 individuals present, 126 returned completed and useable surveys for a response rate of 99.2%. The sample was comprised of 72 (57.1%) men and 54 (42.9%) women. In addition, the respondents were predominately white (79.4%); the remaining 20.6% were students of color. The second largest racial/ethnic group identified was African-American (14.3%). Full athletic scholarship recipients represented 22.2% of the sample, 26.2% were partial athletic scholarship recipients, 23.0% received non-athletic scholarships, and 28.6% indicated that they did not receive any scholarships.

            The survey in the study consisted of five demographic items concerning each participant's gender, race/ethnicity, state of high school graduation, primary intercollegiate sport, and scholarship status. These items were followed by a list of 25 college choice factors such as family members and high school teammates; opportunities for travel and media exposure as a student-athlete; the institution's academic support services, athletic facilities, and degree program options.           Students were asked to rate each of these 25 items using a five-point scale ranging from “Not at All” to “Very Much” to describe the extent to which each factor had influenced their selection of a university. The five factors found most influential in choosing a college of student-athletes included: degree-program options, head coach, academic support services on campus, type of community in which the campus is located, and the school's sports traditions. Among the least influential factors were college choice of friends, the prospect of television exposure, other (non-athletic related) financial aid, school colors, and opinions of high school teammates. Researchers concluded that although academic related issues were key influences for student-athletes, other athletic issues related specifically to their coach, team and sport were also extremely important. “Among the most important were the head coach, school's sports traditions, athletic facilities, athletic training facilities, and the official on-campus visit. The head coach was also identified as the most influential athletic factor for Division I student-athletes participating” (Gabert, Hale, and Montalvo,1999, p. 6). This is significant because it is important to understand the biggest influential factors for student-athletes when they are looking for a college.

It is recognized that intercollegiate athletics is a big business today. “Budget minded administrators have realized that a winning team can provide an effective means of advertising their institutions and securing much needed additional funding” (Letawsky, p. 604). The world of college athletics has grown into a multi-million dollar industry that deals with so much more than the simplicity of the game itself and the student-athletes that play it. The pressure to win is immense for coaches at the college level. The pressure comes from the administration, the boosters, the fans, and from the families of the student-athletes they are recruiting. No one wants their child to work extremely hard in athletics to go to a school with a losing record. It is all about how you present your institution; or in other words, it is about how you sell your product.

            When the Letawsky (2003) study was administered, there already existed some research to determine whether a student-athlete and a non-athlete choose a college using the same thinking process. There had been a few studies prior to this one and there were some common factors among them. Smith (2006) found the college coach and campus environment was most important in the student-athlete decision-making process. Similarly, Miller and Kerr (2002) noted that athletes most often mentioned the coach and reputation of the coach. They also found that the opportunity to play early in their careers was rated as very high in the considerations of student-athletes. Finally, Smith (2006) identified receiving an athletic scholarship and academic reputation as the most important factors in the decision-making process.

            Letawsky and colleagues (2003) compared the influential factors between domestic student-athletes and international student-athletes. The purpose of this study was to uncover the most important factors in the college selection process for international student-athletes attending NCAA Division I universities in the United States and to compare those factors with ones indicated by domestic student-athletes. A sample of 355 student-athletes, including 192 internationals, from 15 NCAA Division I schools were surveyed using a 39-item questionnaire. The top five most important items for domestic student-athletes were: a degree from school leading to good job, overall reputation of the school, the level of competition at which the team competes, getting to know other members of the team, and personality of the head coach (Popp, 2011).

Few other studies have been conducted on this particular topic or related topics; however some of those studies include analysis by Doyle (1990), Reynaud (1998), and Dumond, Lynch and Platania (2007). In Doyle’s study, 605 Division I student-athletes (344 baseball players and 261 softball players) from all eight national geographic regions of the NCAA participated. This research design required that the student-athletes choose from among three university profiles, thereby realistically simulating the decision process. The results for the aggregate sample show that the "amount of scholarship" attribute was the most important factor in the institutional choice process. Many demographic variables were analyzed (sex, race, amount of scholarship received as a freshman, amount of perceived financial need, self-reported grade-point average, questionnaire completion procedures, in-state/out-of-state status, NCAA region, and rank in high school) in conjunction with the choice set data in a post-hoc framework. A primary finding of this study is that a student-athlete's perceived financial need has the most critical impact on the institutional choice process.

Renaud’s study concluded that coaches should focus on recruiting students from within their state, invite young players to visit their campus at an early age, encourage the recruit to make an early official visit to their campus, let the player know where they stand in their recruitment plans as soon as possible, take time to recruit the parents, and finally, do not pressure the student-athlete for a decision. The study by Dumond and colleagues (2007) found results that provide specific insights into those factors that, on average, lead recruits to select particular schools. Primary among these factors is the distance between a recruit and the college under consideration, a finding that is consistent with previous research into college selection. Second, Dumond and colleagues found that the institution’s track record of graduating football players in years past also does not affect the typical recruit’s decision, but the academic reputation of that same institution does affect the decision.

The available research provides a foundation for exploring the research question of this study. The overall result that student-athletes do actually have different top influences than non-athletes when choosing a college provides a starting point for understanding the perceptions of the participants in this study. Understanding the variety of factors involved in a student-athlete choosing a particular university is critical in exploring the more specific question of why student-athletes may prefer a faith-based institution over one that is not faith-based.

Faith in Athletics and Education

            In today’s world, it is not uncommon for there to be an educational institution with a religious affiliation. However, many years ago, mixing religion and education was frowned upon. Of course there are many issues when you combine religion and education; however there are also many benefits to mixing the two elements. The introduction to Burke and Segall’s article in 2011 summarizes the issue: “We Americans are ... taught to think of American society as a secular one in which religion does not count for much, and our educational system is organized in such a way that religious concerns often receive little attention. But if you think for a moment, you may realize that a better question is, where does religion not come into all this? You will not get very far into any educational issues without somehow bumping into religious themes” (p.1).

            Many people believe that education should stay secular. However, what people do not know is that even schools controlled by the state are operated with the traditions of religion dated back centuries. Christianity is well documented in the history and formation of schooling in the United States. The origins of secular educational institutions in western civilization can be traced back to the first medieval universities and the inclination of religious institutions. To the extent that libraries existed at the time, they existed predominantly in Europe within the walls of the grandest and best-endowed monastic institutions. This is also how both secular and religious institutions of account and import were officially registered with the Holy Roman Empire, which was the earliest educational accrediting agency (Anthony, 2001).

            Religion matters to the functionality of schools because the very definition of education is about the transmission of valued knowledge, values, and character. This plays a huge role in the education and character that schools help produce every single day. Because of this, the preparation of our future educators has a need for more substantive conversations about the ways religion might be critically engaged. Discussing this with the teachers themselves is critical because it is in their own classrooms where these practices will be put into place. It is imperative the educators fully understand the analysis of how religion plays a role in both the macro and micro levels (Anthony, 2001).

            Anthony’s research concludes that more and more institutions are becoming religiously affiliated, or at least recognizing the need for religious awareness, because the effects it has on athletics are huge. You witness athletes exemplifying different ways to show religious beliefs in today’s world every day. For example, a football player kneels down to perform the Catholic sign of the cross before a game, a basketball player recognizes God in an on-camera interview, or a team recites the Lord’s Prayer. Where does that start? Does that begin with how they are raised by their parents, grandparents, and neighbors? Is it a reflection of the school they might have attended? How do faith and sports mix?

            Historically, researchers find that sport and the divine go back several centuries (Anthony, 2001). The Olympics began as a festival to honor Zeus. Aztecs used to play a game they deemed as spiritual, although studies show it was a cross between basketball, volleyball, and soccer. During the time of the Civil War, society encouraged men that were physically strong to grow spiritually strong to make the church less feminine. Hubbard’s book (1998) also addresses the history of religion in sports. He found that through many different religions, Muslim, Buddhists, Jews, Christians, there was also a common theme that somewhere religion was implemented into the sport of that age. Many faith-based institutions have reputations within their athletic department that is often viewed as “good sportsmanship.” Now this is not to say that non faith-based institutions cannot have good sportsmanship and every faith-based school will automatically carry this reputation. However, because of certain standards faith-based universities tend to have, it is more common for the athletics of those schools to have that reputation as a whole. Hoffman (2010) from Baylor University, a non-faith based university, discusses Christianity in the culture of sports. He critiques that a Christian vision of sports remains merely superficial—replete with prayers before free throws and praises after touches. He challenges the audience with the questions “What would it really mean to think Christianly about sport?” Games have often been appealed to as analogies of moral life, or to illustrate some aspect of a moral theory. Parry (2011) argues against the idea that games provide an unproblematic venue for moral theorizing, and attacks the assumptions behind the use of games to illustrate and defend ethical theory.

            With a body of research stating that faith and belief goes hand in hand with sport, it only seems fitting that our educational system has institutions that allow that to happen. With faith-based universities just as available to student-athletes as non faith-based universities are in today’s world, it allows the student-athlete to have every choice possible to find the right college for them.

Faith-Based versus Non Faith-Based Universities

            Marginson’s research done in 2007 analyzes differences between public and private universities. Although that is not the topic of interest here, it is necessary to further discuss it because most faith-based universities do indeed fall under the category of private institutions and many non faith-based universities fall under the category of public institutions. According to Marginson, there are benefits to both private and public higher education. The titles of the types of institutions come from the exact definitions of the word themselves. Public education is best defined as all learning options that satisfy mandatory school attendance laws by receiving funding from the public. Private education is best defined as a school founded, conducted, and maintained by a private group rather than by the government, usually charging tuition and often following a particular philosophy, viewpoint, etc. This is usually pertaining, but not limited to, religion affiliation within a specific group of people.

Though individual academics might have a different motivation – they might focus on the creation of knowledge, or the pastoral care of students – for elite universities as institutions, and their leaders, the drive for status is stronger than any other drive, even the drive for revenues. The ‘bottom line’ of these universities is their capacity as a status producer and status-holding attractor. Their core objectives are to advance their research reputations, which are integral to their status and attractive- ness, to attract high scoring students, to produce high status graduates, to sustain the social support of the leading families and the business establishment (Marginson, 317).

 

Because public and private universities offer different benefits, as well as disadvantages, it is important that students explore all options when making their college selection.

            Research done by Volkwein and Parmley in 2000 compares the administrative side of things between public and private universities. Their study reveals that a major “claim in higher education is the positive connection between academic autonomy and quality” (p. 96). The relationship between autonomy and effective performance is assumed to operate both at the level of the individual professor and at the institutional level. The autonomy associated with private institutions suggests that they generally have a more distinctive and superior administrative work environment. It is also known from other literature that such work environments are generally associated with beneficial outcomes like higher worker productivity and lower turnover rates. In Volkwein and Parmley’s (2008) research it is assumed the connection between institutional autonomy, positive administrative work environments, and administrative satisfaction is a more positive one at a private university rather than a public one.

            In an early study conducted by Jackson in 1982, the efficiency of higher education students is analyzed and broken down into several categories. His study shows a table that breaks down academic experiences, student to teacher ratio, location, academic help, general aid, targeted aid, and overall school quality. When looking at these categories in both a faith-based university and a non faith-based university, several differences emerge. In faith-based universities the student to teacher ratio is usually much smaller and academic help and experiences are usually more personable; however, the location, aid and overall school quality do not show much difference than a non faith-based university.

Summary

            Based on the literature reviewed, it is now known what factors that students, both athletes and non-athletes, view as influential in their process of choosing the right college. Researchers have explored the education system as it grew to have both faith-based choices and non faith-based choices for higher education. Most of the differences between the two types of universities have been discussed. Although there are both advantages and disadvantages to both types of universities, not much research has been conducted for student-athletes in particular. This thesis will conduct surveys to better understand the benefits both types of universities have for student-athletes. It will broaden and deepen the understanding about which type of higher educational institution a student-athlete prefers and why they prefer it.

 

 

CHAPTER III

 

Methods

Introduction

            Through two surveys, one for student-athletes and one for coaches, this study examined what factors influence student-athletes’ choice of education post-high school graduation. It investigated how student-athletes and coaches perceive faith-based universities relative to non faith-based universities. Surveys were sent via email to the participants and they were given three weeks to complete the questions. Some participants answered multiple questions in one answer by giving specific examples from their personal experiences.

            The purpose of the study was described for participants and they were promised that their responses would remain anonymous. The first question on both surveys was close-ended and strictly fact-based. All other questions that followed were open-ended and opinion-based. These questions were designed to lead participants to revisit specific experiences during college and to use those experiences to describe their perceptions of the relative strengths and weaknesses of faith-based versus non faith-based universities.

Participants

            Participants in this study were not chosen from any specific university. Direct contact was made with each prospective participant to request his or her participation in the study. Individuals were contacted based on my own personal network of transfer student-athletes and coaches. Individuals agreeing to participate in the study were split into two different categories: transfer student-athletes and coaches with experience at both types of universities. A total of seventy-five people were contacted to request their participation. However, eighteen people declined, leaving the participation rate at 76% with a total of fifty-seven participants. The pool of student-athletes surveyed all attended two different university types: faith-based and non-faith based. Some have even attended three different universities. These student-athletes are considered transfer students because of their attendance at multiple universities. The pool of coaches surveyed have all had experience at multiple universities as well, both faith-based and non faith-based.

Survey Instrument

            There were two survey instruments for this study, one for each pool of participants. The survey for the student-athletes includes nine qualitative open-ended questions that address the reasoning behind choosing their first university, reasoning behind transferring, and the academic and social differences between the two universities. There is also an optional survey for transfer student-athletes that are post-graduate that included four questions addressing how their universities helped or hurt them in their careers.

            This survey was developed based on my understanding of the influences of student-athletes in the process of choosing a university and the factors identified in the literature review as influencing student-athlete choice. I used my own personal experiences as a transfer student-athlete to revise and finalize the survey before sending it out to the participants. The full survey for student-athletes, including the optional one for post-graduates, can be found in Appendix A.

            The survey for the coaches includes five qualitative open-ended questions that address the different universities they have experienced and the variations between them. This survey was developed based on the author’s belief that the coaches’ perspectives could be different than the student-athletes’ perceptions. Many times the adult figure in collegiate athletics states that they know what is best for the students they are involved with; this survey helps address whether or not student-athletes and coaches have similar perceptions about the benefits of faith-based and non faith-based universities. The full survey for coaches can be found in Appendix B.

Data Analysis

            Because the data for this study is strictly qualitative, each survey was carefully analyzed for themes. The surveys were divided into the two categories: student-athlete surveys and coach surveys. The survey responses for each question were examined for common themes. The conclusions were drawn from analyzing what was consistent through the surveys and what was contrasting.

            Based on Miles and Huberman (1984), planning for qualitative data analysis is more complex than analyzing quantitative data. Before beginning one’s research it is paramount that the following two areas are considered: the focus of the study and the tools needed to analyze the data. By determining the focus, the researcher can clarify what data is needed to examine the topic of the study. This helps the researcher to form questions by working backwards from product to source. Obtaining the tools needed to actually perform the analysis takes great organization, especially if the evaluation is going to be done manually. Some qualitative analyses take simple tools of folders, highlighters, and other simple office supplies, while others could use a computer software program to organize and divide the data.

            Full comprehension of both the advantages and the disadvantages of qualitative research before it takes place is essential. Qualitative data can be useful for gaining insight and understanding into the exact process and context of the topic in question. It also allows one to use their own knowledge and expertise of the topic to make sense of the data. Because of this, it adds depth to understanding the study in full. However, one needs to be aware of the negative side to qualitative research as well. More often than not, qualitative analysis is time-consuming and labor-intensive. The findings will not likely be generalizable outside the group from which the participants are sampled during data collection. This also leaves room for the findings to be interpreted differently by different stakeholders and bias to take place, even unintentionally (Briefs, 2009).

            In reviewing the data collected from the surveys, I followed a process for inductive data analysis based on a combination of the noticing, collecting, and thinking process put forward by Miles and Huberman (1984). This combined method allowed for a more insightful process of observation with regard to patterns and themes that emerged when reviewing the surveys. In using this approach, I utilized a five-step process, which allowed for movement between the steps in the process. Each of these steps is described below:

            Step One: Familiarizing Yourself with the Data

            The first step is to familiarize yourself with the data to ensure that you truly understand what information was gathered. In order to analyze your data well, Seidel (1995) emphasizes the importance of reading and re-reading your text multiple times. Seidel also places importance on noticing as a means of understanding that data you have gathered by focusing your attention on the gathered data and making note of any additional observations that strike your interest as you review the data. In reviewing the survey responses, I made note of my initial impressions and looked specifically for material that was applicable to the research question using a coding process. As part of this step, I also looked at the quality of the gathered data. Doing so allowed me to remove from consideration data that was not relevant to the research question.

            Step Two: Narrowing the Data Analysis

            In the second step, I focused my analysis of the data by considering the data within the framework of the research question and sorting it into areas that were similar, much like collecting the pieces of a puzzle into like areas (Seidel, 1998). By sorting the data in this manner, I was able to consider how all of the participants responded to each question or topic as recommended by Taylor-Powell and Renner (2003) and draw out common themes and patterns in specific areas.

            Step Three: Categorizing the Data

            The third step in the data analysis process was to categorize the data that had previously been narrowed down into specific groups by further identifying themes and assigning those themes to the data itself via codes (Taylor-Powell & Renner, 2003). There were some specific themes in the data that I knew I was looking for from the beginning of the study. As other themes emerged during the data reviews, other codes were generated.

            Step Four: Identifying Patterns and Data Organization

            In the fourth step, the data from each survey that was relevant to a particular theme was gathered together for comparison and analysis. At this stage, only the information deemed most relevant was considered. The data was then organized by the applicable category codes, which corresponded to the research question. Much like the thinking process identified by Seidel (1998), this process was undertaken in order to make sense of each grouping of data, to look for patterns and relationships in the individual groupings as well as across groupings, and to see if there were any general discoveries to be made when looking at the data as a whole. These observations enabled me to assess the patterns and connections, determining those that were unimportant and those that were vital to understanding the participants’ experiences.

           Step Five: Interpreting the Data

            The fifth and final step utilized the themes and connections that I had identified in previous steps to explain my findings and attach both meaning and significance to my analysis. I considered the key points discovered by the pattern identification process that the surveys had revealed with regard to my research question. I then considered which of these key points ultimately seemed to be most relevant. After connecting some of these key points from the survey data with their perceived effects by the participants, I felt confident in my ability to draw conclusions about what the data revealed about the research question.

Limitations

            The largest limitation of this study is the size of the survey population. According to the National Center of Educational Statistics (2015) there are over 110,000 four-year universities in the United States. Sending this survey out to only seventy-five people in collegiate athletics illustrates a serious restraint for this study. Another constraint linked to this is that the selection process for the participants was solely based on the author’s experience and network. The participants, both the student-athletes and coaches, were all direct connections with the author. It was critical that each participant had experienced both a faith-based university and a non faith-based university specifically in athletics, which is why these participants were chosen.

 

 

CHAPTER IV

Results

Introduction

            This chapter includes a quick synopsis of the purpose of the study, the research questions listed in the surveys, the demographic information of the participants, and the results of the research. The study’s purpose was to examine how student-athletes and coaches perceive the benefits of faith-based versus non faith-based universities. Qualitative data was gathered from the fifty-seven participants and analyzed utilizing the methodology outlined in the previous chapter.

Research Questions

            Participants were separated into two different groups before being surveyed: student-athletes and coaches. Both surveys related to the comparison of faith-based universities and non faith-based universities. These questions were based on my own personal experiences as well as previous literature on his topic. Questions focused on participants’ personal experiences at both types of universities and can be reviewed in full in Appendix A.

Demographic Data

            The demographic data was collected via email correspondence when the surveys were sent out to the participants. This demographic data was collected to determine if there are any particular patterns to the perceptions of the student-athletes and coaches based on factors such as age, ethnicity, or gender.

            The participants in this study ranged between ages eighteen and forty-two. Nine participants are current coaches at the collegiate level. Thirty-two participants are current transfer student-athletes; sixteen participants are post-graduate student-athletes. All 57 participants come from various levels of collegiate athletics. Those levels include National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA Division I, National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division III, NCAA Division II, and NCAA Division I.

Survey Results

            Research discussed in chapter 2 was used to design the survey questions used in this study. Perceptions and insights shared by the participants are notated in italics through the following sections.

Background Questions (Student-Athletes)

            For the student-athlete survey the two background questions included which universities had been attended and the reason those universities were chosen. The student-athletes listed every university in which they had been involved. In a different question, they were asked to list the reason for choosing each university mentioned in the previous question. Eighteen participants listed two reasons as their top influences: location and scholarship offer. Eleven participants listed those reasons as well, but only chose one or the other. Three participants’ top concern was whether or not the university maintained a Christian environment. These three specific reasons were the only answers given out of all 32 surveys.

Faith-Based University Specific Questions (Student-Athletes)

            For the survey for student-athletes alone, there were two questions specific to faith-based universities. Participants were simply asked about the positive aspects and the negative aspects of a faith-based university. Many participants gave specific situations or examples to exemplify why they answered the way they did. For privacy purposes, names of the faith-based universities stated in their answers are not revealed in the following quotations.

Name the biggest positive aspect of a faith-based university.

            There were two common themes among all participants’ surveys for this particular question. Although answers were worded differently, these two themes are relayed. Eighty-nine percent of the participants stated that the most positive aspect of a faith-based university was the closeness of the community surrounding the school. Stemming from that environment, their teammates became their best friends.

My teammates in the past are still friends, but my teammates now are my forever family. We have a bond like a huge group of sisters. We may live in different places now, but we know that we will always be family.

 

At my new university, my teammates and I actually liked each other. We shared family dinners, Bible studies, and found ways to have fun together without getting mixed up in partying or trouble.

 

My teammates at the faith-based university were like family. We supported each other in everything and we meshed really well because we enjoyed spending all of our time together.

 

Other answers included the challenges academically, the spiritual formation of the university, and having professors that truly cared about them as individuals. Some also spoke of the relationship among all the athletic teams at the university and the support of each other.

We had a really cool connection and relationship with other teams. We all attended each other’s games and cheered for one other. Everyone supported everyone else because we were all friends because the community with our university was so small.

 

At my old university we didn’t really talk or do anything with other athletes or other teams. At the university I am at now, we all know the other athletes. We hang out with them, workout with them, play pick-up basketball games with them. A lot of us live in the same apartment complex, see each other a lot and are actually friends; that is something I really like.

 

Name the biggest negative aspect of a faith-based university.

            The most common theme in the answer to this question deals with the rules, regulations, and standards for the university. At a faith-based university, because of the religious beliefs, the rules for students are typically stricter. Often, people view this as taking away from a “true college experience” because it does not give students as much freedom as a non faith-based university might. Although this was technically the theme that numerically most people stated as the number one negative aspect, the other two responses provided followed closely statistically. The second most frequent answer was that the biggest negative aspect was that the university as a whole portrayed hypocrisy because of the religious affiliation. The third most stated answer was that the location of the university was far from home.

Sometimes you feel forced to do things, such as attend chapel, just because of the rules of the university, even if you didn’t want to.

 

The negative aspect of my new university had to deal with some persecution because of being brought up differently than the majority of the students.

 

The most negative thing would be the fakeness of “being a Christian.” Not everyone was like that, but I saw more people put on this fa?ade because that’s what was expected but it wasn’t very authentic.

 

Although it was a good school and I enjoyed my time there, being from across the country was hard. I’m close with my family so not being able to run home for a weekend or even some holidays made it tough.

 

Other answers also included the smaller size of the university, which in turn created fewer options for extracurricular organizations.

Non Faith-Based University Specific Questions (Student-Athletes)

            For the survey for student-athletes alone, there were two questions specific to non faith-based universities. They were simply asked about the positive aspects and the negative aspects of the school. Participants gave specific situations or examples to exemplify why they answered the way they did. For privacy purposes, names of the non faith-based universities stated in their answers are not revealed in the following quotations.

Name the biggest positive aspect of a non faith-based university.

            The most common theme in the answers to this question came down to two specific answers. The first answer is the athletic reputation of the university and the second is the freedom. Because most of the non faith-based universities discussed in this study are large state schools, the athletics of the university are very prestigious and built on tradition. With that come a bigger budget, better facilities, and better materialistic items for the student-athletes themselves than the smaller, faith-based universities.

It had one of the top football programs in the state and being an athlete we received free, unlimited resources for studying, social aspects, and meals.

 

Receiving a full, athletic scholarship to play volleyball at one of the best schools in the Southeast was extremely exciting for me! I couldn’t wait to get the kind of training at the level that would push me to be the best athlete possible.

 

Freedom. You could do whatever you wanted. Go to class if you wanted; don’t if you didn’t. You didn’t have to worry about as many rules.

 

Other answers included having so much more diversity of people around you, making it easier to make new friends, and the location of the university.

There is so much diversity that you can find a group of friends with a common interest somewhere on campus.

 

I chose [the non faith-based university] simply because it gave me a decent scholarship and it was close to home.

 

Name the biggest negative aspect of a non faith-based university.

            Out of every student-athlete survey, there are only two answers for this question. The first answer is that the size of a non faith-based university can be intimidating. The student-athletes that started their college career at a non faith-based university discussed the size factor coming straight out of high school as being somewhat intimidating. Even being a student-athlete where you automatically have a team to fit in with, walking around finding your classes, other friends, etc. was a little more out of comfort zones. The second answer is that the instructors did not really care about their personal success. Academically, being a student-athlete can be difficult because of missing class for athletic reasons. These student-athletes stated that they did not have teachers who worked very well with them because they were just one out of hundreds of their students, and that became difficult with time management.

I never felt like I belonged anywhere because it was so big. I felt like a fish out of water.

 

Coming right out of high school to this massive campus, it was intimidating. It was hard to make friends, especially because I didn’t know anyone going there.

 

They [the professors] didn’t really care about your success individually and didn’t do a whole lot to improve your chance at success as a student.

 

University Comparison Questions (Student-Athletes)

            The following four questions are specifically related to the comparison between the faith-based universities attended and the non faith-based universities attended. Out of the thirty-two student-athletes participating, nineteen of them began their college career at a non faith-based university and transferred to a faith-based university. For the following questions, this pool of people will be called “Group 1.” Thirteen student-athletes began their college career at a faith-based university and transferred to a non faith-based university. For the following questions, this pool of people will be called “Group 2.” Again, for privacy purposes the names of the student-athletes and the universities discussed will not be disclosed in any discussion or quotations.

Do you regret transferring universities?

            In Group 1, the answer to this question was unanimous. All student-athletes answered that they do not regret transferring universities. In Group 2, nine out of the thirteen, 69%, student-athletes stated that they do regret transferring universities.

 

Between the two universities you were a student at, which one felt more academically rewarding? Why?

            Out of the thirty-two student-athletes participating in this study, thirty of them answered in similar fashion. Ninety-four percent stated that the faith-based university felt more academically rewarding than the non faith-based. One reason given for this choice was that it was more academically challenging; therefore, it was more academically rewarding when success was achieved. Another reason given was the smaller size of the classes created a more interactive and intimate setting that made it more enjoyable to learn. Six percent stated that the non faith-based university felt more academically rewarding than the faith-based. Reasons given for this choice was that the environment was strictly business. Learning in a distraction-free environment where all the teacher focused on was the lecture at hand was better for these two participants academically.

At [the faith-based university] the classes were more challenging so I felt as though I was actually learning a lot more.

 

[The faith-based university] was definitely more academically rewarding. It was the third toughest school academically in the state so when I made good grades, I felt like it was a big deal.

 

[The faith-based university] was so much more academically rewarding because it was so intimate and hands on. It was so interactive I felt like I was actually learning what I was supposed to.

 

[The non faith-based university] was more academically rewarding just because of the level of the classes. There was a much wider range of options to get your degree in and with the sizes of those classes, you did a lot of teaching yourself the material. It made you feel more accomplished if you succeeded.

 

Speak on the differences between the relationships/experiences you had with your professors in general at each university you attended.

            The response for this question was unanimous. All thirty-two student-athlete participants stated that the professors at the faith-based university were much more caring and personable than the professors at the non faith-based university. All but four participants stated that they enjoyed those professor-student relationships at the faith-based university much better. The four remaining participants agreed with the fact that the professors at a faith-based university were indeed better; however they admitted that it did not affect them personally or academically.

At [the faith-based university] classes were small enough so you felt comfortable going to a professor about anything; it’s more personal. At [the non faith-based university] classes could have up to 200 students so there was no way a professor could know everyone individually.

 

I was only at [the non faith-based university] for a year, but I never knew a professor and they never knew me. At [the faith-based university] each professor knew you so well, probably more than you’d like him or her to sometimes! It felt nice to be cared for as a person by my teachers, that I wasn’t just a number to them.

 

I didn’t have bad interactions with my professors at [the non faith-based university] but I didn’t have the great relationships like I had at [the faith-based university.] Those professors genuinely cared about the students individually and their success as a person, academically and otherwise.

 

Between the two universities you attended, which one were you more socially involved in? (Greek life, community service, other clubs, etc.)

            Out of the thirty-two student-athletes participating in this study, 56% of them stated they were more socially involved at the faith-based university they attended. Forty-four percent of the participants stated they were more socially involved at the non faith-based university. Reasons for being more socially involved at the faith-based university include more opportunities to do community service as an athletic team, greater encouragement to participate in things outside of his or her sport, and feeling more acceptance by their peers to join new clubs and organizations. The one reason listed for being more socially involved at the non faith-based university was that because of the size of the university, there were many more organizations and clubs on campus that you could choose to participate in.

I was definitely more involved at [the faith-based university]. I joined a fraternity, which was involved in the community in different ways. We also did a lot of community service as a baseball team, which I enjoyed.

           

At [the faith-based university], my coach encouraged us to get out of our comfort zones and get involved in other areas on campus. We knew that our sport and team came first, after academics, but we still were active in other ways. I was part of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes leadership team, gospel choir, and Reformed University Fellowship on top of being an athlete.

 

Being a minority, I was involved in an organization called the Filipino Student Association at [the non faith-based university]. They welcomed anyone of any race and were involved in sports, music, dance, and community service. It was really cool to be a part of something like that and when I transferred to [the faith-based university] there were no type of organizations like that.

 

Post-Graduate Student-Athlete Questions

 

            In the survey for student-athletes, there is a section included at the end of the first nine questions for post-graduate student-athletes only. Out of the fifty-seven total participants for this study, forty-eight are either current or retired student-athletes. Sixteen of those participants have graduated with a degree and are considered retired student-athletes. Those sixteen participants have answered the following four questions. Of those sixteen, nine participants are in Group 1 from the previous section and seven participants are in Group 2. Again, for privacy purposes the names of the student-athletes and the universities discussed will not be disclosed in any discussion or quotations.

Do you have a job/career today in the field you studied in college?

            Out of the sixteen participants, 81% responded with “yes” to this question. The three participants that make up the other 19% responded with “no.” Out of the thirteen that responded “yes,” ten participants are a part of Group 1 from the previous section. Three participants that responded “yes” are a part of Group 2. All three participants that responded “no” are a part of Group 2. Because this question was close-ended there was no elaboration by the participants as to where they work or why they may not have a job in their field of study.

Did you have many opportunities to pursue jobs in your field post graduation?

            Out of the sixteen total participants this answer was a unanimous “yes.” There are ten participants in Group 1 from the previous section and six participants in Group 2 from the previous section. Because this question was close-ended there was no elaboration by the participants as to how many opportunities, where, and how quickly they had those opportunities post graduation.

 

 

Did one university you attended have better networking opportunities than the other? Which type? Explain please.

            Out of the sixteen participants, 69% of them stated that the faith-based university had better networking opportunities than the non faith-based university. The five participants that make up the other 31% stated that the non faith-based university had better networking opportunities than the faith-based university. Reasons given that the faith-based university was better include being more active in the community, therefore knowing more outside connections, having personal relationships with faculty and staff who help you network, and being a graduate of a well accredited university. The main reason given that the non faith-based university was better include the size of the university being beneficial in networking because there are more people to have the chance to know.

[The faith-based university] had better opportunities because they had an internship program in my field of study that was required for all undergraduate students.

 

The Christian university I attended provided more connections through their relationships with local churches. Also, the professors went the extra mile in helping me connect to various places so I could have more luck finding a job.

 

I had more networking opportunities at [the non faith-based university] I attended because of the size of the department I was in. There were so many professors and staff members that between them, there were endless connections you could use if you wanted to utilize them.

 

 

 

What was one area post-graduation that you felt you weren’t as prepared for as you wanted to be? Do you think there is something your university could have done to prevent that? In what way?

            Out of the sixteen total participants, 75% stated that they felt confident after graduation beginning their job search. Of those twelve participants, seven belong to Group 1 from the previous section. The other five belong to Group 2 from the previous section. In their answers, the certainty of their preparedness after graduation was undeniable. The other 25% had two different answers. Of these four participations, two belong to Group 1 and two belong to Group 2. Three participants, two from Group 1, stated that they wish they had been better prepared in interviewing skills. One participant stated that they were not ready for the post-graduate tests that are required for graduate school, such as the GRE, MAT, and GMAT. Out of the three participants that gave the answer of “interview skills” only one emphasized the desire for their undergraduate classes to have had more practical application with these skills. The other two stated that their classes did deal with it and in their opinion there was nothing else the university could have done to help better prepare them. The one participant that gave the answer of “testing preparation” explained that they wished their university had offered prep courses for tests of that nature.

That’s a tough question because I don’t think there was anything I was unprepared for. I felt as though {the faith-based university] prepared for life after graduation extremely well.

 

My classes for my undergraduate degree had interview practice, yet I still didn’t feel as prepared as I hoped going into real life interviews post graduation. I’m not sure that the university could have done anything different in that case though.

 

I felt that the university could have discussed the process of looking for a masters program and the preparation that comes with that more. I was unprepared for the GRE as I’m sure other people were as well.

 

 

Background Questions (Coaches)

 

            The survey for the coaches participating in this study was a total of five questions. The first two questions were strictly close-ended questions discussing the institutions they have been a part of. The first question asked at which university they begin their coaching career and the second question asked them to list every university/college at which they have coached. Answers given included universities from all regions of the United States.

Transition Specific Question

            The survey for the coaches participating in this study includes one question regarding the purpose for their change in university. The number of universities that the participant has been previously employed by will determine the details of the answer to this question.

What was the reason you left your position at the previous university to coach at the one you are at now?

            Of all questions asked in both surveys, this question provided the greatest variety of answers. Two of the nine participants in the coaches’ survey shared an identical answer, but aside from those two all other answers were unique. The other seven participants gave different reasons for leaving their previous university. Because of the variety listed, the answers given for this question are provided below.

• Location-move back closer to home (2 participants answered with this)
• Time to move on to new opportunities
• Previous position was temporary
• Better athletic program and better reputation
• To work for a hall of fame coach
• Wanted to move back to where college was attended
• Better job offer
• Family reasons

Some specific quotations are given below to elaborate on the reasons listed above.

I left [my previous job] because I wanted to move back closer to my family and where I grew up. I wanted to raise my children in the same environment that I was raised in.

 

I left my position at [my old university] because I just felt that it was time for a change and [my current university] presented a great opportunity.

 

Although I absolutely loved my previous position, it was only a volunteer position to get my foot in the door. So I gladly accepted an offer with [my current university] so further my career.

 

Faith-Based University Specific Questions (Coaches)

 

For the survey for coaches alone, there are two questions specific to faith-based universities. They were simply asked about the positive aspects and the negative aspects of the school. Many gave specific situations or examples to explain why they answered the way they did. For privacy purposes, names of the coaches and the faith-based universities stated in their answers will not be revealed in the following quotations.

 

Name the biggest positive aspect of a faith-based university.

            The most common theme found in the answers to this question is the fact that the athletic department is such a welcoming community as a whole. Of the nine participants, 56% answered in this way. Thirty-three percent answered that the relationships with their student-athletes are much better than at a non faith-based university. Eleven percent (1 participant) answered that the student-athletes involved are much more mature and better role models at a faith-based university than at a non faith-based university.

Everyone was always nice and welcomed people with open arms. It was more of a family atmosphere where people were friends, not just colleagues.

 

Student-athletes come to you and trust you with issues they have outside of the sport you coach. They come to you with trouble academically, personally, and athletically. You just have a better relationship with your players because the trust is greater in that environment. It makes for a better relationship on the court as well.

 

The maturity level. Having children of my own, my kids were around positive role models that were focused on how to become better people, better citizens and influence a nation. They understood there was more to life than basketball.

 

Name the biggest negative aspect of a faith-based university.

 

            There were three common themes found in the responses to this question. Of the nine participants, three stated that the most negative aspect was the strictness and rules of the university. Three others stated that the pressure to conform to the religion of the university as a whole was the biggest downfall of being at a faith-based university. The last three participants stated that the worst part of being at a faith-based university had to do with the way you coach and recruit because of the standards of the university.

All of the rules, the strictness of the university as a whole—it is probably not the top ten things student-athletes want to worry about when heading off to college for the first time.

 

The pressure to feel like you need to believe what everyone else places their faith in that surround you can be a little discouraging. If you don’t have the same faith, you can sometimes feel like an outsider, even as an adult.

 

It can hurt you during recruitment at times; perception of faith-based universities as a whole is conservative. Some of the top high school student-athletes in the nation are not going to even give you a shot if that is the case.

 

 

Non Faith-Based University Specific Questions (Coaches)

            For the survey for coaches alone, there are two questions specific to non faith-based universities. They were simply asked about the positive aspects and the negative aspects of the school. Many gave specific situations or examples to demonstrate why they answered the way they did. For privacy purposes, names of the non faith-based universities stated in their answers will not be revealed in the following quotations.

Name the biggest positive aspect of a non faith-based university.

            The most common theme in the answers for this question was the term “freedom.” Six participants, 67%, stated that the best part of a non faith-based university was the freedom for the students and faculty. There were three other answers, given by one person each. Those answers include that it is easier to recruit, the open-mindedness, and more experience working with people who may live and believe differently than you.

Athletes, students, and faculty alike are encouraged to maintain their own beliefs, which allows the team to be more open-minded and accepting of each other’s differences.

 

You receive more of a true university experience learning to live and work with people who do not believe and think the same way you do. It allows you to get out of your comfort zone.

 

Name the biggest negative aspect of a non faith-based university.

 

            The response given the most for this question was the same as the previous question: freedom. Five of the nine participants, 56%, stated that even though freedom was probably the most positive, it serves as a double-edged sword and is also the most negative. The other four participants agreed on the only other response being the friction that is caused within the team because of the variety of beliefs and values.

Some students aren’t quite ready to handle that much freedom and it definitely shows in their grades, their decisions outside of their sport, and it could lead to something damaging much more long-term.

 

The different beliefs may come in conflict with each other; and have the potential to cause friction among those who are not open-minded to the difference of others.

 

Because of the different values of the student-athletes, you see a lot more selfishness usually. Their thoughts are more on themselves as opposed to helping and making others around them better. It’s not as easy to find true role players that want what’s best for the team.

 

Concluding Thoughts

 

            As I completed the steps of organizing and interpreting the data, one common theme stood out among the rest. The theme of family and community was spoken of in many different answers, both from student-athletes and coaches alike. Whether the survey question was focused academically, socially, or discussing post-graduate life, over half of the responses circled back to connect their answer with the positive or negative side of the community of the university. The meaning and significance of the results are discussed in the next chapter.

 

 

CHAPTER V

 

Discussion

The research conducted for this study provided insight into how student-athletes and coaches perceive the benefits of faith-based versus non faith-based universities, particularly in the three categories of academics, social life, and networking. Based on the findings, it is confirmed that a faith-based university is perceived as overall more beneficial for student-athletes.

Benefits of Faith-Based Universities

Although the size of the participant group limited this study, the overall results revealed a consistent theme. In the student-athletes’ survey, faith-based universities were perceived as more beneficial than non faith-based universities in all nine questions. In the coaches’ survey, definite results could not be determined. Potential reasons for this finding will be discussed in this chapter.

First, findings for the academic focus of this study will be discussed. Going back to the previously reviewed research, there are four topics related to academics listed as top influencers of college choice for high school student-athletes. These topics are type of degree programs, academic support services, overall reputation of the university, and degree departmental networking resources. All four topics are mentioned in the responses of participants in at least one question, which reflects the personal significance to the student-athletes themselves. Two of those topics, overall academic reputation/degree programs and academic support services, were specifically given as the biggest positive aspects of both faith-based and non faith-based universities in the student-athletes’ surveys. The personal experiences of the participants emerged in the answers throughout the entire survey.   For the question asking the most positive aspect of a non faith-based university, participants spoke of the lone factor of size resulting in more degree programs and more academic support services. For the question asking the most positive aspect of a faith-based university, participants broadly spoke of the overall reputation of the university, which included academics. They grew more specific when mentioning the individual attention given to students by faculty and staff that was generated from genuine care. They spoke of the willingness of the professors to go the extra mile in order to help the students academically. So, participants generally perceive faith-based universities as superior due to their more caring atmosphere and greater individual attention to student academic needs. Because the results may be partially due to the smaller size of the typical faith-based university, a future study is recommended that would control for the issue of size, comparing faith-based universities to non faith-based universities of similar sizes. The details of this recommended study are discussed below.

Questions seven and eight on the student-athletes’ survey were academic specific, asking which type of university was more academically challenging and the difference between the professor relationships. The results for both questions showed that student-athletes preferred faith-based universities to non faith-based universities in these areas. These results support the conclusion that student-athletes generally prefer a faith-based university rather than a non faith-based university when it comes to academics.

Secondly, findings for the social focus of this study will be discussed. Returning once again to the previous literature, there are two topics that could be categorized as social listed as top influencers of college choice for high school student-athletes. Those two topics are the type of environment/community built around the university and the players/coach of the team for the student-athlete. These two topics were given as the two biggest positives of a faith-based university. One detail supporting this includes specific quotations from the participants stating that the community surrounding the faith-based university they attended was welcoming, supporting, and encouraging. Another supporting statement demonstrates how many of the participants in this study found lifelong friends in their teammates and coaches. Participants also spoke about their involvement around campus and the relationships with other athletic teams; these experiences were always described as positive. When discussing the surrounding community at a non faith-based university in the answers to these surveys, there were fewer positive responses. Some specific examples were that the non faith-based university was described as having a cold, impersonal approach and that the difference of values and beliefs within the team caused separation, rather than togetherness. The only affirming point regarding these aspects and a non faith-based university was the fact that it can be easier to make friends because of the larger size of the university and campus. Based on the participants’ answers, it can be concluded that student-athletes generally prefer a faith-based university when it comes to the social life.

Lastly, findings for the focus of networking in this study will be discussed. Previously researched literature finds that a large concern of student-athletes is what they will do after college graduation. The questions specified for post-graduate student-athletes had the same clear results as the questions before them. Almost 75% of the participants specifically stated that the faith-based university has better networking connections than a non faith-based university. The reasoning linked back to the environment created by faith-based universities, with faculty and staff willing to help the student-athlete in any way possible, both academically and personally. The participants whose answer was that the networking connections were better at a non faith-based university only spoke of the size of the university itself being the reason there were more opportunities. Because of these findings, it is concluded that student-athletes generally find better post-graduate networking connections at a faith-based university over a non faith-based university.

What’s Next?

            After concluding this study, it is my recommendation that the next steps involve education. I was recruited in high school and I chose to play basketball at a non faith-based college. Some reasoning behind my choice includes the main factor of growing up at a faith-based high school I had made up my mind I wanted to branch out and experience something new. I had told my parents I would not attend a faith-based college simply because that is the type of school I had been a part of my entire life. Long story short, my school was nothing as it seemed and I ended up miserable my freshman year. I thought about giving up basketball entirely until my high school coach and mentor convinced me to go meet the coach at Faulkner University in Montgomery, Alabama. Faulkner University is a Church of Christ, private institution and although I had made up my mind before visiting, I obliged because of the respect I had for my coach. It turned out that they were beginning a women’s basketball program and during my visit, I fell in love with the campus environment, faculty and the coaching staff. My mind was completely changed and I decided to attend on an athletic scholarship. I attended there for the next four years, loved every minute of it, met life long friends, and furthered my career in the world of basketball, which led me to where I am today. Because of my own personal journey as a former transfer student-athlete and now coach, I would like to enhance education about the differences between the two types of universities.

During my own recruiting process, several universities are “selling you their product.” As a high school student-athlete, it is hard to hear all of the positives and make a decision that is going to affect the rest of your life. As I look back, I realize that student-athletes at that age, and even their supporting families, may not look at every factor that could sway their decision one way or another. Most of them see the big name of the university, the athletic record, the fancy facilities, etc. and do not dive deep enough into some other factors that have more of an effect on them long-term. I plan on using my experiences and personal knowledge of knowing how difficult that decision was to better educate current high school student-athletes being recruited. I will use the previous research and literature from this study to inform my own student-athletes and their families about every factor involved in choosing the best college, not just the ones that are attractive at first.   After I earn my Master’s Degree of Education, I have accepted the role of a high school teacher and coach in Huntsville, Alabama. I plan on using the information found in this study to help better prepare my own student-athletes during the college selection process. As a high school coach, I will be along side my own student-athletes during their recruitment process. I will be able to share the statistics from research during that process that will help better educate everyone involved all factors that could possible influence the decision. Using my own experiences, the experiences of the participants in this study, and what was learned through these surveys, the future student-athletes I come into contact with will have a better understanding of the differences between the two types of universities. I also plan on speaking to the administration at my future institution about possibly creating a course to better inform student-athletes and their families about the differences between the two types of universities and how that can affect their college selection process. This type of course or session would ideally be about 45 minutes to an hour long and could be held inside the school. This will be easier to carry out with the technological tools increasing and becoming a bigger part of collegiate recruiting. It would be beneficial for the student-athletes and their families to learn about this research done between the two types of universities before having to make a final college choice. It would be an optional extracurricular course for any student-athlete at the school and any family members that would like to attend. I would also invite all coaches at the school to attend as well. This type of session would help better educate the high school student-athletes themselves and their families of every factor that should at least be recognized during the college selection process. I believe it would be beneficial to go deeper into some of the factors that may originally get overlooked that could have a large effect on the student-athlete long term.

It is also important to raise the awareness of the administrators, college coaches, and university recruiters of the faith-based universities regarding their strengths and weaknesses as viewed by student-athletes. I plan on publishing my findings so that more faith-based universities can see the values they give to the student-athletes. Understanding both the positive and negative aspects can help them better their recruiting processes so high school student-athletes may not have to endure the process of transferring during college. Most faith-based schools have trouble competing with non faith-based schools in the recruiting process because of some of those factors we discussed earlier. In the review of the coaches’ surveys, their knowledge barely scratches the surface as to how to take action for the student-athletes they work with daily. In my opinion, the coaches see that a faith-based university can be overall more beneficial to student-athletes than a non faith-based university; however it is unclear to them how to be certain student-athletes receive the full spectrum of those benefits. More training in the recruiting process, especially regarding how to use social media as an effective communicator and networking tool about the positive aspects of a faith-based university, is needed in the collegiate coaching world. I believe that better marketing during the recruiting process may help a high school student-athlete realize some of these benefits before making the decision. For the coaches and faculty at non faith-based universities, it is my recommendation that they be more involved in the extracurricular activities alongside their student-athletes. Even at non faith-based universities, there are many excellent organizations that students can join and have opportunities to be involved in the community. If coaches encouraged their teams to participate in these opportunities together, as well as went with them, it could change the dynamic of the environment of their team. This environment is the main reason student-athletes gave as to the reason they transferred from a non faith-based to a faith-based university. This could help limit the number of transfers because of the student being unhappy.

The biggest limitation of this study is the size factor of the universities discussed by the participants. Many of the positive effects the faith-based universities have could be due to the smaller size of the institution when comparing to the non faith-based universities. It is my recommendation that another study is needed concerning both types of universities that are more similar in size than the ones involved here. Research would be needed to compare the size of the faith-based and non faith-based universities across the country. Is it the size of the school that leads to the positive experiences reported by the participants in this study or is there something truly unique about a faith-based institution that contributes to the positive experiences of student-athletes? Learning more about the positive attributes of faith-based universities for student-athletes can help all of those connected with student-athletes in these schools to enhance their experiences and better communicate things to prospective students and their families. It is my recommendation that we use the data collected from this survey and ask similar questions but to a much larger pool of people. It would serve well to double the size of the total participants and break down the data by gender and size of the institution in the new study. You could perform the study in two ways: qualitative or quantitative. If you were to do mostly qualitative research, the questions would be almost identical. If you were to do mostly quantitative research, the data and answers given in this study would create the close-ended questions for the new study. Doing either type as a new study would be beneficial to this audience of college athletics, high school student-athletes, and their families.

My biggest concern and reasoning for choosing this topic was because there are hundreds of transfer student-athletes every year. Most of those scenarios are because of the personal unhappiness of the student-athlete. The majority of that is usually linked back to the environment of the university and the team. It very rarely links to the athletic success of the team or an external factor such as facilities, which are some main factors appealing to the eye during recruitment. If we can better educate all parties involved in the high school recruitment process about what is better for the student, I believe the long-term success of the student-athlete will be overall more positive as well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Anthony, M. J. (2001). Introducing Christian education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Baker Academic.

Baucom, C., & Lantz, C. (2001). Faculty attitudes toward male division II student-athletes. JOURNAL OF SPORT BEHAVIOUR, 24(3), 265-276.

Beller, J. M. (1995). The Relationship of Competition and a Christian Liberal Arts Education on Moral Reasoning of College Student Athletes.

Burke, K. J., & Segall, A. (2011). Christianity and its legacy in education. Journal

            of Curriculum Studies, 43(5), 631-658.

Carodine, K., Almond, K. F., & Gratto, K. K. (2001). College student athlete success both in and out of the classroom. New Directions for Student Services, 2001(93), 19-33.

Cunningham, S. (1999). The nature of workplace mentoring relationships among faculty members in Christian higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 441-463.

Downs, P. G. (1994). Teaching for spiritual growth: An introduction to Christian education. Zondervan.

Doyle, C. A., & Gaeth, G. J. (1990). Assessing the Institutional Choice Process of Student–Athletes. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 61(1), 85-92.

Dumond, J. M., Lynch, A. K., & Platania, J. (2007). An economic model of the college football recruiting process. Journal of Sports Economics.

Educationis, G. (1965). Declaration on Christian education. 1981) Vatican Council II: The conciliar and post conciliar documents Leominster, Fowler Wright, 725-737.

Engstrom, C. M., & Sedlacek, W. E. (1991). A study of prejudice toward university student‐athletes. Journal of Counseling & Development, 70(1), 189-193.

Furukawa, D.T. (2011). College Choice Influences Among High Achieving Students. University of Nevada Las Vegas Dissertation

Gangel, K. O., & Benson, W. S. (2002). Christian Education: Its History and Philosophy: Its History and Philosophy. Wipf and Stock Publishers.

Harrison, K. C., & Lawrence, S. M. (2004). Female and male student athletes' perceptions of career transition in sport and higher education: A visual elicitation and qualitative assessment. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 56(4), 485-506.

Hill, K., Burch‐Ragan, K. M., & Yates, D. Y. (2001). Current and future issues       and trends facing student athletes and athletic programs. New Directions        for Student Services, 2001(93), 65-80.

Hoffman, S. J. (2010). Good game: Christianity and the culture of sports. Baylor Univ Pr.

Hubbard, S. A. (1998). Faith in Sports: Athletes and their Religion on and off the Field. Doubleday.

Hull, J. E. (2003). Aiming for Christian education, settling for Christians educating: The Christian school's replication of a public school paradigm. Christian Scholar's Review, 32(2), 203.

Jackson, Gregory. A. (1982). Public Efficiency and Private Choice in Higher Education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 4 (2), PP 237-247.

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

Marginson, Simon. (2007). The public/private divide in higher education: A global revision. Higher Education, 53 (3), PP 307-333.

McCormick, R. A., & McCormick, A. C. (2006). Myth of the student-athlete: The college athlete as employee. Wash. L. Rev., 81, 71.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook

            of new methods. Corwin, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Miller, P. S., & Kerr, G. (2002). The athletic, academic and social experiences of intercollegiate student-athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 25(4), 346.

National Center for Education Statistics.(2015).The Condition of Education 2015.

            NCES 2015-144.

Parry, J.(Ed.). (2011). Theology, ethics and transcendence in sports (Vol. 4).

            Routledge.

Popp, N. (2011). A comparison of the college selection process for international

            and domestic student- athletes at Division I universities. Sport

            Management Review, 14(2).176-187.

Reynaud, B. C. (1998). Factors influencing prospective female volleyball student-athletes' selection of an NCAA Division I university: toward a more informed recruitment process.

Seidel, J. (1995). Different functions of coding in the analysis of textual data.

            Computer-aided qualitative data analysis: Theory, methods and practice,

            52-61.

Smith, A. (2006). Where to Play: How Student-Athletes Perceived the College Selection Process. University of New Orleans Dissertation.

SUN, W., JIN, C. Z., & SUN, L. T. (2004). Philosophical Research on Sports Ethics——Seeking Eternal Faith in Sports Scientific Development from the Different Qualities of Sports Culture [J]. Journal of Beijing University of Physical Education, 12, 008.

Volkwein, James. F, and Kelli. Parmley. (2000). Comparing Administrative Satisfaction in Public and Private Universities. Research in Higher Education, 41 (1), PP 95-116.

White, E. G. H. (1977). Fundamentals of Christian education. Review and Herald Pub Assoc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX A

For Student-Athletes Only

This survey will be anonymous. Your answers and personal information will never be revealed in the findings of this study. Some questions are strictly opinion-based. Some questions may not apply to you if you have not graduated.

 

1. Which University did you begin your college career at?

 

1. Why did you choose that university during your high school years?

 

1. List both the most positive and negative thing at that university for you.

 

1. Where did you transfer to and why?

 

1. List both the most positive and negative thing at the new university for you.

 

1. Do/Did you regret transferring universities?

 

1. Between the two universities you were a student at, which one felt more academically rewarding? Why?

 

1. Speak on the differences of the relationships/experiences you had with your professors in general at each university you were a student at.

 

1. Between the two universities you were a student at, which one were you more socially involved in? Describe in what ways (i.e. Greek life, community service, other clubs, etc.)

 

For Post-Graduate Students Only

1. Do you have a job/career today in the field you studied in college?

 

1. Did you have many opportunities to pursue jobs in your field post graduation?

 

1. Did one university you attended have better networking opportunities than the other? Which type? Explain please.

 

1. What was one area post-graduation that you felt you weren’t as prepared for as you wanted to be? Do you think there is something your university could have helped prevent that? In what way?

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX B

For Coaches Only

This survey will be anonymous. Your answers and personal information will never be revealed in the findings of this study. Some questions are strictly opinion-based. Please feel free to speak on your own athletic career as a student-athlete as well if applicable.

 

1. What university did you begin your coaching career?

 

1. List every university that you have coached at.

 

1. What was the reason(s) you left your position at previous universities to coach at the one you are at now?

 

1. Name the biggest positive AND negative aspect of a faith-based university.

 

1. Name the biggest positive AND negative aspect of a non faith-based university.