Chana shull
Research post 5
INTS249
The Effects of the NCAA Guidelines on the Equitable Treatment of Student Athletes
“The study was limited by the following criteria. One hundred and eight NCAA member Division I-A football and basketball institutions were surveyed. Those institutions represented every geographical area across the United States. An equal number of presidents, athletic directors, and head coaches of football, men’s basketball, and women’s basketball were surveyed. Fifty-four institutions were randomly selected from the 108 Division I-A institutions. Thirty student athletes (10 participating in football,
10 participating in men’s basketball, and 10 participating in women’s basketball) from each of the 54 institutions were also surveyed. The survey instrument consisted of 34 questions which were broken down into four groups: (1) payment of scholarship student athletes, (2) equitable treatment of student athletes, (3) work for scholarship athletes, and (4) NCAA regulations.”
In this article they surveyed the athletes on different questions, the first set of questions (1-11) consisted on payment of scholarship towards these athletes. They said in this group of questions, the responders showed a significant difference with their gender for who had a better scholarship (p < .0001) and race also was another factor and showed a significant difference as well (p < .0002). The next set of questions (12-18) where specifically about the treatment of the student athletes. The groups who were surveyed showed that “the student athletes and the head coaches were in disagreement with presidents and athletic directors” (p < .0009) which was a significance difference. The minorities of this part of the survey were in a disagreement with the whites (p< .0019). the next questions were work for scholarship athletes and the only significant difference were the student athletes who responded, saying that they should be allowed to work in some type of way and be compensated for their work because they have so much practices to do and they have no other time during the week because they dedicate all their time too school and sports. The last set of questions were addressed too the current NCAA regulations, and there was a significant difference on how the student athletes viewed the NCAA regulations versus the presidents’ athletic directors and the head coaches views. These results show the unfairness of how everything is done. First it starts off with race and gender and you can see how they don’t get the scholarships that’s someone else would get. Then you can tell that the students and the directors obviously have different views because the directors are getting treated better and they are getting paid while the student athletes have to work their butts off to even make it to a major league in the future, while making nothing out of it right now. These results show everything.
Wells, R. J. (1996). The effects of the NCAA guidelines on the equitable treatment of student-athletes (Order No. 9701452). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (304300556). Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.mutex.gmu.edu/docview/304300556?accountid=14541
Ints249 digital literacy 