Latest Articles

George Minoso2025-05-20T15:27:15-05:00

Transitioning from High School Athletic Director to School Level Administrator: Leadership Considerations

George Minoso2025-05-20T15:27:15-05:00May 16th, 2025|Contemporary Sports Issues, Leadership, Sports Coaching, Sports Management|

Transitioning from High School Athletic Director to School Level Administrator:
Leadership Considerations

Athletic or Activities Directors are prominent in high schools and middle schools across the U.S. This position often carries similar responsibilities to those of school administrators, and it is common for athletic directors to transition into other school leadership roles. This study provides insight into the transition from Athletic/Activities Director (AD) to building-level administrator by examining leadership characteristics and traits consistent with individuals who have made the transition. This mixed methods study gathered perceptions from six currently seated high school principals (former ADs) through two-stage interviews and compared the interview data with responses from a corresponding survey that gathered data from a state-wide sample of principals who had also transitioned from AD. The results suggest multiple connections in responsibilities between the AD and principal position that could aid in preparing ADs who aspire to become building administrators. Likewise, results point to various factors that influence an AD to exit the position, whether or not they are seeking an administrative role. Data are broken into external factors that contribute to the decision, as well as internal characteristics that are consistent with those who transition into administrative positions. Words of advice are shared for those considering this transition.

Keywords: Principal, Assistant Principal, High School, Coach

Transitioning from Athletic Director to School Principal:

Leadership Considerations

            Multiple pathways exist to the role of principal; however, a frequently observed career trajectory starts with a teacher, often with experience as an athletic coach, and transitions into the position of athletic director (AD). This is followed by a move to assistant principal, and, for many, culminates in the position of head principal or even superintendent. For those in an AD role, responsibilities vary but often include leading fundraising efforts, managing large budgets, overseeing disbursement and payment of coaches and officials, coordinating multiple schedules, managing human resources, and communicating with various stakeholders. Indeed, the AD position is often associated with high levels of stress as these leaders juggle the often-competing interests of school administrators, coaches, parents, and athletes, all while working with finite resources of money, time, and facility availability. Many of these duties and stresses are not unlike those expected of school administrators themselves. As athletic directors gain experience and confidence in managing these varied responsibilities, they often realize that a transition to a school-wide leadership role, such as assistant principal, is a logical progression in their professional careers.

            This study more closely examines the leadership characteristics, managerial expectations, and career decisions of secondary school administrators (assistant principals and principals) who were once secondary school athletic or activities directors. Consideration is given to leadership expectations and managerial responsibilities inherent to the athletic director position, and how this position and its corresponding experiences can assist in preparing future school administrators.

For this study, no distinction is used between athletic directors who are solely responsible for athletic programs, and “activities directors” who also are responsible for managing and scheduling other extra-curricular activities in the school or district beyond athletics (such as musical and/or theatrical events). Rather, the term “athletic director” (abbreviated AD) will be used to encompass either or both roles, always inclusive of athletics. Additionally, for the purposes of this study, “building-level administrators” include assistant principals and head principals. Individuals in a “dean of students” role are not considered building-level leaders within the context of this study. In fact, oftentimes, the dean of students role is found combined with AD positions, especially in smaller districts. Yet, this position will not be considered parallel to that of assistant principal or principal, because it often lacks administrative responsibilities consistent with the principal role, such as faculty supervision, instructional leadership, and resource management.

The purpose of this study was to provide insight into the transition from athletic director to building-level administrator by examining leadership characteristics and traits consistent with individuals who have made the transition from AD to building-level administrator. Three research questions guided the study: (a) What leadership skills or traits required of the AD position assist in transitioning to a building-level leadership position? (b) What similarities and differences exist between the characteristics of the athletic directors and building-level leaders? and (c) What internal and external factors influence athletic directors to transition from AD to building-level administrator? Before addressing these questions, attention is given to literature that informs the study.

Literature Review

This study is meant to provide further insight into potential upward mobility for those in an AD role. To better understand the complexities associated with transitioning from AD to a building-level administrative position, a brief review of relevant literature provides important foundational knowledge and context related to a) the evolution of the athletic director position, b) responsibilities of the athletic director, and c) transitioning to building-level leadership.

The Evolution of the Athletic Director Position

A paucity of research exists on potential upward mobility for high school athletic directors (AD) seeking advancement in their career. Although some studies exist that emphasize the teacher/coach balance (Conner, 2020; Konukman et al., 2010; Richards et al., 2018) or the gender inequities in AD positions (Ray, 2010; Sisley & Steigelman, 1994; Whisenant et al., 2015), fewer highlight the leadership characteristics that both positions have in common or engage with stakeholders who have made this transition. To better understand the complexities associated with transitioning from AD to building-level administrator, this research study aims to contribute to an area of educational scholarship that is currently underexplored. The following literature review provides context for the role of AD and its evolution, as well as highlighting research studies that have attempted to begin filling this void in the field.

The role of the athletic director (AD) in U.S. high schools has undergone significant transformation, becoming a more organized and demanding position than in the past (DeCesare, 2017; Furr, 2015; TSSAA, 2024) In the early 1900s, the informality of school sports meant that physical education teachers and coaches handled most athletic duties. At that time, the position of a dedicated athletic administrator had not yet developed. Coaches, who often held additional teaching responsibilities, organized athletic teams, coordinated schedules, and managed logistics in addition to teaching. Modern conceptualizations of the athletic director did not emerge until the mid-20th century, as school sports programs grew both in size and complexity (DeCesare, 2017).

The expansion of high school athletics during the 20th century necessitated specialized administrative oversight. By the 1950s and 1960s, many schools hired full-time ADs to maintain pace with the popularity and competition of new sports programs. To show this decades-long change, Nixon (1974) referred to “modern” sports as “large-scale social units with highly specialized divisions of labor, elaborate hierarchies of authority, and highly rationalized, formalized goal pursuits and normative controls” (p. 108). The establishment of organizations like the National Interscholastic Athletic Administrators Association (NIAAA) in 1977, which provided athletic directors with training, certification, and professional development, continued to professionalize the role of ADs (Blackburn et al., 2013). Early ADs typically still served as coaches or teachers, but their roles shifted to include the more strategic management of budgets, scheduling, and compliance with expanding state and national regulations.

The complexity of ADs’ responsibilities grew in the 1980s and 1990s. This era saw a shift toward greater attention on student-athlete well-being, including academic eligibility, mental health, and injury prevention. Thus, beyond logistical tasks like scheduling and equipment management, principals expected ADs to manage public relations, fundraising, legal compliance, and conflict resolution, with a particular focus on Title IX and student-athlete safety (Blackburn et al., 2013). Furthermore, ADs started assuming greater leadership responsibilities, overseeing coaches and athletes while navigating the intersection of education, sports, and community involvement (Hoch, 2014).

The position of athletic director had evolved into a highly specialized, full-time profession by the 2000s, especially in larger school districts. Part of this shift occurred in response to high-stakes testing; districts demanded principals with educational backgrounds rather than athletic ones, the latter a more commonplace reality before No Child Left Behind. Before this change, principals could support ADs more actively because they shared an athletic background (Furr, 2015). As high school sports programs became more integral to school communities, the responsibilities of ADs expanded to include advanced skills in management, communication, and financial oversight (Croskrey et al., 2018; Green & Reese, 2006). Fowler and colleagues (2017) found that in their study examining multi-level perspectives, the majority of principals desired ADs they hired to have content knowledge in law, budget, finance, and ethics. As the position continues to change, the ongoing professionalization of the role remains a priority, ensuring that athletic directors are equipped to meet the challenges of managing high school sports in the modern era (DeCesare, 2017).

Responsibilities of the Athletic Director

Expectations and responsibilities within the AD position vary widely and sometimes remain elusive until the candidate has been hired and arrives on the job (Lindsay et al., 2024). For example, Smith and colleagues’ (2023) study revealed that ADs tend to be under-prepared for legal issues that may arise. They explain that “social media issues, sexual harassment, and hazing are incidents that put schools under the microscope, and a well thought out and detailed education and awareness program as well as a response plan are similarly imperative” (p. 173). Furthermore, ADs frequently serve solely as an athletic or activities director; however, in some instances, ADs split their duties by combining the role of AD and another assignment within the school. In his dissertation research, DeCesare (2017) reported 43% of ADs worked full-time, while the other 57% served in some sort of dual role where they worked in another position in addition to being a high school athletic director, including school administrator, teacher, dean of students, or counselor. Athletic directors frequently report their coaching responsibilities when discussing their job description (Baghurst et al., 2014). DeCesare (2017) found that 32% of ADs had coaching responsibilities in addition to serving as AD. A larger percentage (67%) of these AD/coach combinations existed in small schools (DeCesare, 2017). This dynamic proves particularly challenging due to the resource scarcity often present at small schools where ADs are more likely expected to serve dual roles (Smith et al., 2023).

According to Baghurst and colleagues (2014), an AD’s ability to balance the myriad of new expectations and provide strong leadership determine the success of athletic programs. Stier and Schneider (2000) provide an exhaustive list of the “successful” AD: creating positive relationships with parents, community members, and other staff in school settings; maintaining high visibility at athletic events; preventing and solving problems; establishing networks with the media, booster clubs, and support groups; using and creating department handbooks; and possessing fundraising skills. Moreover, ADs must guarantee that coaches develop the necessary skills and have a comprehensive understanding of their legal obligations, including compliance with safety protocols and athlete protection standards (Armstrong & Stevenson, 2023). DeCesare (2017) explains that “although a dilution of duties occurs between collegiate and high school athletics, the essential elements and competencies of the position remain the same” (p. 18). Thus, the leadership quality expected of college athletic directors holds for secondary schools as well.

Athletic directors at middle and high schools across the United States play a multifaceted role that extends well beyond organizing sports events. According to Fegeley (2023):

I think AD stands for “All Day” and “All Duties.” I just hope that people outside of our

profession realize all the responsibilities that a high school athletic director has. It is more

than just two or three 14-hour days a week. We are responsible for the safety and

well-being of hundreds of student-athletes on a daily basis, and this includes eligibility

checks, facility maintenance, scheduling officials, planning special events, hiring

coaches, event management, community outreach, and countless other tasks. I could add

dozens of more items to this list. (as cited in Hoch, 2023, para. 11)

ADs develop comprehensive safety plans that must be meticulously documented and regularly updated to reflect changes in sports regulations and school policies (Armstrong & Stevenson, 2023). Subsequently, they oversee the implementation of these plans, verifying that all coaching staff are fully trained on the specifics of supervision, risk management, and student safety (Fowler et al., 2017; Armstrong & Stevenson, 2023).

In regard to staff management, ADs help select and train coaches and other athletic personnel (Croskey et al., 2018; Fowler et al., 2017). This responsibility encompasses more than just hiring qualified individuals; it involves continuous professional development and ascertaining that all staff meet the state and district requirements for certifications, such as CPR (Fowler et al., 2017; Armstrong & Stevenson, 2023). Athletic directors must also enforce policies around technique instruction and injury prevention, which are vital in minimizing risks associated with sports participation (Emery et al., 2006). They facilitate training sessions and meetings to discuss and reinforce these topics to coaches, emphasizing the importance of proper technique and the legal implications of negligence (Doleschal, 2006). School leaders also expect ADs to proactively communicate important information not only to coaches and staff but also to student-athletes and their parents. In Kerr and colleagues’ (2023) study about sports communication within middle schools, researchers noted that the parents had “concerns about how well policies were implemented, particularly when there was pressure to win. This included athletes feeling pressured to continue playing and thus not disclosing their injuries, officials missing illegal/foul play, and prioritizing winning over safety” (para. 30). By managing these responsibilities appropriately, ADs uphold that school sports programs are not only compliant with legal standards but also aligned with educational goals that prioritize student safety, well-being, and development.

Transition to Building-Level Leadership

As ADs assume a variety of administrative roles, they develop a highly transferable skill set to the principalship, which often leads them to explore the transition from managing sports programs to managing entire schools. ADs must work closely with principals and other administrators to match their program’s alignment with the school’s overall goals; this collaboration allows ADs to gain insight into the day-to-day operations of school management, including budgeting, staff supervision, and policy implementation (O’Brien, 2017). In many cases, ADs develop strong communication skills, ethical leadership, and business management abilities, all of which are critical for success as a school principal (DeCesare, 2017). As their experience grows, many ADs find that their administrative expertise and leadership capabilities make them well-suited for the principalship, where these same skills are in high demand (Elam, 2022).

However, ADs who make the transition to building-level administrator cite other motivation than similarity of skill set or confidence in their administrative expertise. According to Elam’s (2022) qualitative study, some districts are consolidating the role of assistant principal with athletic director to cut costs. Unfortunately, participants in Elam’s (2022) study who served in the dual AP/AD role lambasted the time lost with family, mental exhaustion, and their “extensive managerial responsibilities” (para. 36). Several external factors also factor into this particular career transition. According to Joy and Radhakrishnan (2012), career growth opportunities, increased job security, and the desire for greater influence within the school system could motivate ADs to consider building-level administrative positions. In particular, the principalship can offer more power and influence compared to the AD role, which may appeal to individuals seeking to expand their leadership footprint. Additionally, the principal position arguably comes with less physical and logistical pressure compared to the demanding nature of overseeing sports programs, especially in larger schools with competitive athletic teams. In his dissertation research, Epps (1991) explored differences between the AD role and other building-level administrators in Detroit Public Schools. He found that principals and assistant principals had high respect for their ADs compared to head coaches, and they valued business and management skills in their ADs because they understood the rigorous demands of the position.

All ADs and principals bring unique perspectives on leadership, understanding that it is integral to their roles. The studies that examine leadership style of successful ADs and principals more broadly highlight the positive effect of transformational leadership (Hobbs, 2018; Pharion, 2014); however, those that address diversity explain that “experiencing shifts in student demographics becomes increasingly complex, requiring strategy, reflection, distributed leadership, and vision” (Monogue, 2015, p. 213). Conversely, Rodin (2014) identified instructional leadership and collaborative team building as the two most important leadership skills for working with diverse populations. In Macdonald’s (2012) dissertation work, he explored the relationship between public high school athletic directors’ leadership style and the outcome on head coach behavior. He found that contrary to previous research, ADs needed to use a comprehensive leadership approach, incorporating transformational, transactional, and passive/avoidant styles, to create a significantly positive impact. These studies suggest that the leadership competencies required for both roles are complex and scarcely examined, especially regarding the transition between them.

Current Context

The purpose of this study is to provide insight into the transition from AD to building-level administrator by examining leadership characteristics and traits consistent with individuals who have made this transition. While ample research exists on the roles and responsibilities of both athletic directors and school principals (DeCesare, 2017; Judge & Judge, 2009; Mathis et al., 2014; Stier & Schneider, 2000; Young et al., 2010; Zayas, 2018) and subsequently their effect on student achievement (Karadağ et al., 2017; Waters, 2003), there is a notable gap in the literature regarding the experience, motivation, knowledge base, skills transfer, and leadership style from AD to principal. By studying these transitional components, valuable insights into the pathways and challenges involved in moving from the athletic director role to the school level administrator role can be gained.

Methods

Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected as a part of this multiple case study. Interviews were conducted with six principals from a midwestern state who have transitioned from AD to principal. The interviews were analyzed and thematically coded. All interviews were confidential. Individuals who participated were assigned pseudonyms, and all identifying characteristics were removed that could connect participants to their districts. Initial contact with participants was via email. Through email, the study was explained and consent was given.

Surveys were administered to individuals from the state who were not selected for the interview but who have made the transition from AD to school-level administrator. Interview data triangulated survey data to ensure trustworthiness.

Participant Selection

Participants were selected by first emailing the assistant director of the state’s athletic director association, requesting information for school-level administrators in that state who were previously athletic directors. The state was divided into six geographic areas by grouping state-established cooperative educational service regions. After grouping the regions of the state into six geographic areas, one individual (principal) was purposely selected from each of the six areas. This approach ensured broad representation across the state and reduced the potential for location bias or region-specific responses. All six participants were White males over the age of 40.

 Additionally, electronic surveys were emailed to all school-level administrators who were potential participants but were not selected for interviews (65 potential). A total of 43 individuals responded to the survey. Of the 43, 38 (88%) were male, and 5 (12%) were female. Most were over 40 (88%). Many (42%) were over 50. All participants were White.

Data Collection

Data were collected from two sources. Qualitative data were collected through telephone interviews with six participants. Quantitative data were collected through online surveys using Google Forms.

 Interview participants (n=6) were contacted via a telephone call and asked a set of 14 questions. Interview questions were grounded in literature and developed to gain insight into the research questions for the study. Among other questions (such as demographic information, experience, background, etc.), participants were asked, through open-ended questions, to describe their lived experiences in the AD position and compare that to their current school-level leadership role. Participants were also asked to describe and prioritize (rank order) factors that had contributed to their decision to leave the AD position and discuss internal and external factors and stressors that contributed to their decision to exit the AD position. Additionally, all participants were asked to share advice for other individuals who could be considering a transition from AD to school level administrator. All interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically coded using HyperResearch Software.

            Survey research was used to gather quantitative data from former athletic directors who were currently serving as school-level administrators (n=43). Survey data were used to triangulate and provide trustworthiness to qualitative data. Individuals were asked to complete an online survey consisting of 40 questions. Multi-level, ranking questions, and some open-ended questions were asked that were closely aligned to the interview questions and that informed the research questions for the study. No statistical measures were used to ensure the validity or reliability of the survey because the primary reason for the survey was to triangulate interview questions, gather demographic information, and give participants a chance to answer open-ended questions anonymously and in private. Questions began with demographic information (gender, age, and race), and continued with professional questions (job responsibilities, stressors of the positions, time management, etc.). The final question of the survey was open-ended and asked respondents to provide additional comments and/or advice for anyone considering the transition from AD to school-level leader. 

Data Analysis and Findings

            This section includes analysis of data from both the interviews and the surveys. By including both qualitative and quantitative data sources, an effort was made to provide a broad understanding of the motivations for moving from the athletic-director position to a building administrator position, while addressing the identified research questions. Rather than separate data analysis from findings, a decision was made to embed findings within the analysis section and then follow up with a brief discussion. This allows the reader to consider findings within the context of the data.

Interviews

Interview participants shared insights into their lived experiences during their time as athletic directors and as school-level administrators. Participants identified factors impacting their choice to transition from athletic director to building administrator. Based on recurring comments made throughout all interviews, a total of 15 thematic codes emerged in this study.  These codes were then divided into three main categories: a) external factors, b) internal factors, and c) stressors. Thematic codes aligned to external and internal factors as shown in Table 1. Thematic codes aligning to items causing stress in the AD role are shared and discussed later.

External Themes

            External themes are related to factors associated with the organization itself. Only the top three most-coded responses in this category are discussed.

Parental Pressure.

The external factor coded most often was that parental issues play a major factor in the decision to leave the position and pursue a building-level administrator role. Although only four of the six interview participants mentioned parental factors playing a role in their decision, the four who mentioned this did so multiple times (10 total).

When referring to parental issues causing stress and creating problems, the participants mentioned that parents get too involved in conduct violations and playing time for their children. One participant stated that most of their issues arose from “. . . conflict with parent and [athletic] code enforcement. Usually, it didn’t matter if the athlete or the parent knew they were guilty [of the infraction]. They would still fight it!”

            Another participant noted that parental problems helped make the decision to change jobs much easier: “As an AD, I was getting tired of the same parents complaining about playing time or other issues. In the school I came from, this was the main problem. We had great kids at the school. But the parents gave me troubles when it came to athletics. They made the switch that much easier to make.”

            Parental pressures and issues often came about unwarranted and unexpected. While some of the athletic directors acknowledged that they expected issues with parents to a certain extent, they also said that parents often caused problem after problem. One participant commented, “. . .parents always seemed to exceed expectations for the number of problems they can create. I swear they have nothing better to do!”

Student / Staff Issues.

The only external factor that contributed to the job change that was mentioned by all participants was that student and staff issues contributed to their decision to exit the position. All six interviews contained this response, and all participants mentioned it only once. Constantly managing students and staff is the primary role of a building administrator, which might make that higher-paying position more appealing. One participant stated, “I would spend the majority of my day dealing with student or staff issues, and I decided, I don’t get paid enough for this!” Another commented that, “There is no end to the stupid things some student athletes do. And we often involve the principal in our discussions, so I thought, I might as well [be in that position].”

Staff issues primarily involved hiring more so than staff conflict. Getting the best coaches and assistant coaches, officials, and event workers all took sufficient time. Some ADs had support in these hiring decisions but not always. One AD commented, “I can spend countless hours getting everyone to work a track meet. And that same week, I might have other events too, baseball, softball, and usually I have people hired well in advance, but some people cancel and there is a last-minute sprint to get everything covered.”

Coach Conflict.

            Lastly, one participant mentioned twice that “coaches creating problems” was a reason they transitioned away from the athletic director position. Coaches can cause stress on athletic directors by being demanding and requesting too many things, as well as being allowed to have too much control. The participant said the following about where the issues originated: “Coaches in our own school . . . the situation I came into was about coaches being able to do more than what they probably should have been allowed to. I would have coaches knocking on my door, complaining about the schedule. It wasn’t the parents for me; it was my own coaches. They were unrealistically demanding.”

Internal Themes

Internal themes are tied to the characteristics or attributes directly associated with the participants. Three prominent themes of internal factors contributed to the decision of an athletic director leaving his/her position for a building administrator position. Only the three most-coded internal themes are discussed below.

Better Hours for Family.

            The most frequently applied code (15 times) for internal themes was “better hours for family,” which was mentioned in all six interviews. Every participant mentioned that a reason they stepped away from the athletic director position was because it would benefit their family. This meant different things for each participant. One shared:

As an AD, I was [at work] 7am to 10pm some days. Long, tough hours away from family, dealing with unexpected issues or parent issues. That wasn’t fun. Day to day as a principal, I am much more sure about what I’ll be dealing with. It helps too because I have assistants [principals] who share some of the load.

Some participants wanted to spend more time with their kids and be able to see them grow:

It’s better hours for me. I had two sons that played Division III college sports. They were both in college playing; I was an AD and coach. This [job change] provided an opportunity to do something different but also better for me. I could see my kids more.

Another participant added, “It was strictly the family needs. That’s really all it was for me. I needed more time with my family. I had a seven-year-old and a two-year-old. I didn’t want to see my kids raised without a father.”

One participant mentioned that the stress of the athletic director position caused a marriage to be ruined, so a change of positions was needed to fix the relationship. “Without getting into too much personal detail, it kind of crossed into my marriage. It wasn’t doable. It tore my family and my wife at that time apart. After that I just realized it wasn’t workable.”

Upward Mobility / Increase in Pay.

Others wanted to be able to make more money. In one case, it was specifically so their spouse could stay home to raise their children:

I was a teacher, then became a stay-at-home dad. I got my masters so that I could have the ability to increase my income. I needed to make this change in my career so my wife could help raise our own kids. Making more money allowed our family to do this. Status wasn’t really a reason for me. I loved being an AD. That was my dream job. But I knew my family needs, and that led me to becoming a principal. Increase in pay and a feeling that I could contribute more ultimately led me to change roles.”

One participant commented,

The increase in pay was important. The way the [state] retirement system works came into consideration as well. It is based on your top few years of compensation. That impacts the rest of your life in retirement. So, I wanted to get those last three years’ salary as high as I could.

Increase in Power / Influence.

Only one participant made the decision to move to a school administrator position because of the desire to have a broader influence over students’ lives. Although others did mention that they felt an increased sense of impact on student learning and the educational process, one contributed the decision to having broader influence, stating. “For me, it was a desire to make change in kids’ lives. I felt as a coach I impacted my players, but as an AD, I didn’t have that direct impact. As a principal, I indirectly influence their educational experience every day.”

Stressors

            As codes were applied to participant interviews, stress became a recurring theme. So much so, that the decision was made to address it separately. This decision was in part because many of the stressors present in participant perceptions are also present in the literature regarding school level administrative leadership. Therefore, when making a decision regarding transition to school level administration, a current AD could reflect on these individual stressors to compare their experience to that of the participants of this study.

            Worthy of notice is that two of the six participants shared that they had multiple responsibilities while they served as an AD. One was an assistant principal, and another was a teacher. Undoubtedly, wearing multiple hats results in multiple sources of stress. The participant who was also a teacher shared that there was more structure in the day as an AD than in the current role of building administrator:

My day as a school administrator is a little different because I’m no longer teaching. I taught as an AD, and now I don’t. My days are less structured. More contact with staff and parents now. I work with the community now. When I was an AD, it was more structured and I was dealing with scheduling and things like that. Now there are very few days that are structured. Even this [interview] could’ve been interrupted. Things came up as an AD, but not in the same sense as it is now.

Another participant, however, was in a unique situation in that the individual was in a dual role of AD and assistant principal. Although their comments were coded, it is worth noting the unique circumstance. This participant shared:

The district in which I was AD I was also an AP [assistant principal]. It was an experiment of the district. I was able to do both and kind of see what a principal position would be like, but it was like having two jobs and it was a nightmare! It was for personal and family health need that I had to make a change. That struck me the most because I was AP for a year before becoming principal. I needed to do one job instead of two jobs. It was just too much.

The position of AD is one that is rich with stressful situations daily. As participants shared their perceptions, several thematic codes developed and were applied. The codes applied most often can be found in Table 2.

Information gathered from the six interviews provided insight about the many stressors of both the athletic director and, to a degree, principal positions because several participants discussed similarities and differences between the two positions. While the stressors of the athletic director position are said by some to lead to them transitioning out of the position, the stressors are not necessarily exclusive to that position. Nonetheless, the five stressors shared most during interviews are reviewed in order of the number of participants sharing the stressor.

Teacher and Student Issues.

Not surprisingly, stress associated with teacher and student issues was most common among participant responses. As shown earlier, all participants commented that this concern contributed to their decision to transition to the school level administrator position. Likewise, all participants listed these issues as one of the most stressful aspects of their jobs. One participant shared, “It gets old fast. Day in and day out. If it were just the students, it wouldn’t be as bad.” Another commented, “Teachers often question eligibility. When grades come out, stress goes up!”

Current administrators often shared that these concerns were consistent across positions. One shared, “It’s the usual suspects: Parents, teachers, students [where stress originates].” Another participant summed it up this way: “It’s people that are unwilling to pull along with, and are trying to even pull against [you]. Students and my family cause stress. I cause my own stress. But the adults who don’t want to change are what cause the most stress.”

Unexpected Problems.

It appears that, despite many hours of planning, unexpected problems are a regular occurrence in the lives of contemporary ADs. Five participants commented on unexpected problems contributing to their stress. The nature of the unexpected problems varied but often involved weather. One participant shared a personal story: “You’re sitting there dealing with a situation about kids smoking pot, and you have to deal with that and investigate the situation, but then all of a sudden it starts to rain. You’ve got baseball and soccer and softball games or practices going on. Now what happens?” Another shared, “You want to be able to manage the conflict in a way that best represents the school. And there’s a lot of problem solving. You’re troubleshooting with whatever comes up. Always putting out fires. And you never know where they will start on a given day, or a given hour.”

Managing Conflict.

Managing conflict appears to be a regular stressor for participants. Four participants commented many times (10 total) on the importance of managing conflict in their role. One participant shared, “I’m just always dealing with conflict. That’s just the nature of the job. I can’t lie to you, but that’s a lot of what it is.” Comparing the AD to the principalship, another shared,

In this job [school administrator], you can never make everyone happy. It’s the nature of the position sometimes. It was the same as AD. If a student athlete gets suspended, the parent, and sometimes the coach, are unhappy. When grades come out, I swear that some parents think I assign their kids’ grades!

A few of the participants shared concern that they did the AD job with very little assistance, making the stress something that isn’t shared. One participant stated, “At my school the AD has such a wide variety of responsibilities because you’re the only one working to get this stuff done. Everyone wants it done, and many complain when it isn’t.”

Parent Pressure.

Another source of stress externalized as parental pressure. Parent issues was the most-coded response regarding the decision to transition to a building level administrator role, and likewise, it was coded ten times in the responses of four participants as a source of stress. One participant shared only this, “Definitely the parents [causing the most stress]. Not a question about that one. Not much more to say than that.”

One participant added that code enforcement (ensuring students follow the athletic code) and parent pressure often go hand in hand, “Conflict with parents and code enforcement. That I think were the most stressful situations. They often happen at the same time.”

Another participant felt that the experience of being an AD helped in preparation for dealing with similar situations as a building administrator, sharing, “As an AD, I dealt with a lot of parent issues. This helped me get ready for problems that I would get as a principal. … I got comfortable with most things that would come my way as an AD, and this helped me when I took the principal job.”

Scheduling Conflicts.

Though hand-in-hand with unexpected problems, the sheer volume of scheduling conflicts and issues appears to cause stress for ADs. One participant shared, “Scheduling and transportation are sources of stress. Just trying to get everyone everywhere they need to be.” Another commented on the difference between the current building level administrator position and the previous AD position, sharing, “You really spend more time with people as a principal. As an AD, I spent a lot more time scheduling officials and those types of things.”

Similar to comments regarding unexpected problems, weather seems to impact stress regarding scheduling conflicts for some ADs. One stated, “Scheduling causes a lot of stress. Spring sports are tough. The weather controls everything in [state]. That always is the hardest and causes stress.”

Survey Data

            Survey data were gathered through online surveys of individuals who met criteria for inclusion in the qualitative section of the study but who were not selected as participants (n=43). Survey questions were designed to triangulate and provide validity to qualitative data, often providing opportunity for ranking of criteria related to different aspects of the positions.

Demographics

            To gain better understanding of the survey respondents, demographic data were first gathered. Of the 43 respondents, 38 identified as male (88.4%) with the remaining 5 (11.6%) identifying as female. The same percentage (88.4%) were over 40 years of age, with 17 (39.5%) over the age of 50. All but one of the respondents (97.6%) worked as an AD in schools with enrollment of fewer than 2,000 pupils, and 26 respondents (60.5%) worked in schools with enrollment of 1,000 or fewer students. As building level administrators, 38 (88.4%) had worked in schools with 2,000 or fewer students, and 28 (65.1%) worked in schools of 1,000 or fewer students. Not surprisingly, based on student enrollment, most respondents categorized their schools (while ADs) as rural (48.8%) or rural and remote (32.6%). While serving as building-level administrators, 39.5% categorized their schools as rural and 37.2% as rural and remote. The distinction between rural and rural and remote was based on location and distance to an urban center. A location could still be characterized as rural and be within 25 miles of an urban center, while rural and remote required it to be both small and outside of a 25 radius of an urban center. As mentioned previously, all survey respondents identified as White / Caucasian.

Career Path

To provide a better view of the survey respondents, several questions asked about the career path the building level administrator had taken. Nearly all the survey respondents were head principals (97.7%), with one respondent (2.3%) also holding a combined position of building principal and district administrator / superintendent. Most had been in their current position for 1-5 years (37.2%) or 6-10 years (32.6%).

With regard to which position survey respondents held directly before accepting the building level administrator position, a surprising number of respondents (17 or 39.5%) held a combined position of assistant principal and athletic director, while 34.9% were solely athletic directors (23.3%) or activities directors (11.6%). Five individuals (11.6%) were in a combined role of dean of students and athletic/ activities director. Thus, roughly half of the respondents (22 of 43) were in a combined role of assistant principal / dean of students and athletic / activities director before transitioning to the head principal role.

            When respondents selected (from a list) all the positions they had held in their careers, not surprisingly 100% had been teachers. Nearly all respondents also had coaching experience, with 88.4% having served as a varsity head coach. A complete list of responses is shown in Figure 1.

Perceptions

Survey questions (non-demographic or career path) were asked in two distinct parts so the respondents could answer both for their time as an athletic director, as well as their time as a building level administrator. These questions were designed to gather information in four main areas: a) management perceptions, b) job stress, c) leadership preparation, and d) job responsibilities. Each area is examined further below.

Management Perceptions.

            Regarding perceptions of managerial responsibilities of both the AD and school level administrator positions, respondents were asked four questions regarding a predetermined list of managerial aspects of the positions. The list of seven managerial responsibilities was developed from contemporary literature. The seven responsibilities included were:

1. Managing students (including athletic eligibility)
2. Managing parents / community (including booster clubs)
3. Managing staff (including coaches, referees, event workers, etc.)
4. Managing finances (budgets)
5. Managing facilities (scheduling gymnasiums / facilities, locking up after events, etc.)
6. Managing events (including scheduling, execution, and transportation to/from)
7. Managing safety (including planning and drills)

Respondents were also provided an “other” category, in which they could write in responsibilities that were not available in the provided list.

            When asked to select which responsibility took up most of their time in the AD role, the top responses were managing events (58.1%), managing staff (26.5%), and a three-way tie for third between managing parents / community, managing students, and managing facilities (all at 4.7%). This contrasted with the responses regarding the question about what should take up most of their time. When answering that question, managing staff was first at 53.5%, followed by managing events (23.3%) and managing students (20.9%). It appeared that ADs spent more of their time than they would like on managing events, but for the most part, the top categories were consistent.

            Regarding the building level administrator position, respondents ranked their responsibilities differently than they did in their AD role. School level administrators ranked managing students as the number one responsibility that consumed their time (46.5%), with managing staff a close second (44.2%). No other category received more than one selection. As administrators though, respondents overwhelmingly felt that most of their time should be spent managing staff (69.8%), while managing students also received several selections (20.9%). Interestingly, more than one school level administrator took the opportunity to write in other options, which included teaching and learning, educational leadership of staff, and professional development (each written in one time).

Job Stress.

Regarding job stress in each position, respondents were provided a list of potential areas of stress for each position. They were then asked to rank (1-8) each item in relation to the amount of perceived stress it caused in each position (AD and building level administrator). The list of job stress items was developed from contemporary literature regarding stress in the AD and school administrator positions. The list stayed consistent between both positions so that a better comparison could be made; however, respondents did have an option to add an “other” and assign it a rank order.

The potential areas of job stress used for this study:

1. Having too heavy of a workload to finish during a normal workday
2. Being interrupted frequently
3. Imposing excessively high expectations on self
4. Feeling that meetings take up too much time
5. Trying to resolve parent/school conflicts
6. Supervising and coordinating tasks of many people
7. Administering student discipline

For athletic directors, the stressor selected as number one most often (18 times) was #1 Having too heavy of a workload to finish during a normal workday. Subsequently, thirty-four respondents ranked that stressor in their top three. With regards to other stressors ranked most often in the top three, #3 Imposing excessively high expectations on self, was ranked 27 times in the top three, while #2 Being interrupted frequently, saw 22 responses in the top three.

As school level administrators, respondents also selected #1 (too heavy of a workload) as their top stressor most often (12 times), with 25 ranking that stressor in their top three. The stressor that was ranked in the top three most often was #3 (imposing high expectations on self), which was selected 25 times and was ranked first by nine respondents. Unlike their responses regarding the AD position, the third most ranked (in top three) stressors showed a tie between #8 Administering student discipline and #6 Having to make decisions that affect the lives of people you know, each being ranked in the top three 23 times. Thus, there appears to be similarities with regards to stressors across both the AD and school administrator role, but it appears that handling student discipline and making important life-impacting decisions more heavily weighs on school administrators.

Leadership Preparation.

The first research question for this study asked what leadership skills or traits required of the AD position assist in transitioning to the building-level administrator position. Although interviews provided an opportunity for participants to discuss this transition and the salient leadership skills and traits, the survey more clearly asked respondents to provide weight to different skills, thus ranking them.

One question on the survey provided a list of eight skill / traits and asked respondents to rank them in order one through eight in the order of importance that the skill / trail helped them prepare to be a school-level administrator. The list was generated from contemporary literature with regard to important skills that are relevant to both athletic administrators and school-level administrators:

1. Overseeing school events
2. Working with students
3. Working with faculty and school staff (including supervising coaches)
4. Working with parents and/ or community members
5. Working with booster clubs or support organizations
6. Managing conflict
7. Solving problems
8. Managing operational / organizational tasks (handbooks, budgets, scheduling, officials, etc.)

Athletic directors overwhelmingly selected #7 Solving problems as the skill / trait that helped them best prepare for the role of school-level administrator. This skill / trait was ranked number one by 18 respondents and ranked number two by another eight. Overall, this skill /trait was ranked in the top three by 30 individuals (70%). This supports data from the interviews where four participants commented 10 times on the stress caused by managing conflict in the role of AD. Survey data support that by being subjected to the stress associated with managing conflict, athletic administrators build the necessary skills to handle stressful situations, which applies directly to their success as building-level administrators.

The skill / trait that was next in importance was #3 Working with faculty and school staff (including supervising coaches). This skill was ranked number one by 13 respondents, and it was ranked in the top three by 29 individuals (67%). From interview data, “student and staff issues” was a highly ranked external factor in the decision to change from an AD role to building-level administrator. Further, “teacher and student” issues was listed as a source of stress by all participants in the interviews.

Also ranked in the top three skills / traits by many respondents was #6 Managing conflict. This was only selected as number one by eight individuals, but it was ranked in the top three by 30 respondents (70%). Consistent with interview data, managing conflict was mentioned as a source of stress by four participants a total of 10 times. Furthermore, an external factor that contributed to the decision to transition to building-level administrator was often conflict related, specifically including conflict with coaches.        

Job Responsibilities.

Regarding perceptions of job responsibilities of both the AD and school-level administrator positions, respondents were given a list of 12 common job responsibilities consistent with the literature on athletic director and/or building-level administrator positions. Respondents were then asked to rate each responsibility on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being “very important” and 1 being “unimportant.” A rank-ordered list for both roles, based on the mean score for each responsibility, is shown in Table 3.

For the athletic director position, the two job responsibilities that scored the highest are “setting ethical standards in the school” (mean of 4.53) and “working with the community.” For reference, these two job responsibilities had mean scores of 4.84 and 4.7 respectively for the building-level administrator position. According to these data, as building-level administrators, those job responsibilities are deemed to be more important than they are for athletic directors.

The highest mean scores for the building-level administrator responsibilities are “hiring staff” (mean of 4.91) and “managing or supervising staff” (mean of 4.88), suggesting that these two job responsibilities are deemed to be the most important according to the building-level administrators. The largest difference of scores between the two positions is for the job responsibility of policy development. Building-level administrators deemed this to be a more important job responsibility for their current role than when they were athletic directors. The difference in mean scores is .7, as it averaged to be a 3.65 for athletic directors and a 4.35 for principals.

The job responsibility that was scored lowest for both job positions is “Fundraising.” This job responsibility had a mean score of 3.26 for athletic directors and a mean score of 2.58 for building-level administrators. These data suggest that both positions did not find importance in focus on fundraising. This is somewhat inconsistent with literature related to athletic administrators, as often, the job entails raising funds for the athletic programs. However, at the high school level, this is often handled by booster clubs, and although the AD oversees the booster club, he or she is often not directly involved in the fund-raising efforts.

Discussion

Building-level administrators and athletic directors have similar job responsibilities in terms of working with students, staff, and parents. Both have similar stressors, which include dealing with parental complaints, violations of the school code of conduct, and handling issues that arise from the staff, as well as issues that pop up randomly on a day-to-day basis. There is little doubt that work done as an AD helps prepare individuals for the building-level administrator role. In fact, over half of the survey respondents (51%) had been in a combined role of either assistant principal or dean of students and athletic director before transitioning to the building-level administrator role. Undoubtedly, crossover existed between these two roles, and the distinction between which hat one was wearing during a given situation became blurry. However, important to this study is that these two roles assume similar levels of stress and handle similar situations, thus honing leadership skills that will translate.

Similarities and consistencies across both the interview and survey data suggest that the AD role helps prepare building-level leaders. The three areas highlighted in the study included: a) comparable stressors, b) comparable leadership skills or tasks, and c) comparable job responsibilities.

Data suggest that ADs and building-level administrators experience similar stressors and respond to similar origins of stress. For example, school personnel (e.g., coaches, teachers) with unique issues demand time of both the AD and building-level administrator. Handling the stressors requires ADs to build necessary skills, which transfer to other leadership roles. These included problem solving, working with faculty and school staff, and managing conflict. Likewise, although ADs scored some job responsibilities differently than did building-level administrators, consistencies still arose within the top five responsibilities, including the importance of hiring staff, setting ethical standards, and working with the community.

Interview data shared primary sources of stress for athletic directors, and these data supported reasons cited for transitioning out of the AD position. For example, some participants felt strongly that they were undergoing substantial pressure from parents, student and staff issues, and conflicts with coaches, and these stressors contributed to their decision to leave the position. In some instances, participants made it clear that they felt they “might as well” move into a building-level administrator position because they were already undergoing parallel levels of stress or pressure. Even others noted that their level of stress and pressure went down after they transitioned to a building-level administrator position, and the time spent with their families went up. In fact, better hours for their family created a clear internal pressure that contributed to the decision to transition. Athletic directors felt that they put in many hours at school away from their family and that they would actually be able to spend more time with their families after becoming building-level administrators.

One final discussion point worthy of mention is that all six of the interview participants became building-level administrators in the same school district in which they were an athletic directors. The decision to transition was influenced by many factors, including the desire to spend more time with family, make more money for similar levels of stress, and be able to influence educational change on a larger scale.

Advice from Interview Participants

            Though not a specific research question, it seems fitting to conclude with advice from the six individual interview participants. Each of these individuals agreed to participate in a telephone interview to share their perceptions of both roles, and the interviews concluded with a final open-ended question asking these current building-level administrators what advice they would offer an individual who is considering transitioning from an AD position to school administrator. These bits of advice can further assist someone who might be contemplating the same transition.

Each participant’s response is shown below.

 Participant 1:

Take an opportunity to sit down with someone who has gone through it. The more people you can get input from will help you. I don’t think I came into this job knowing exactly what I was getting into, but I thought I could easily take it on, and I probably undermined some of the challenges that came with switching roles. Be open minded and be willing to listen to others. You’re going to make mistakes, but you’ve just got to be ready to respond to them.

Participant 2:

I think you have to be prepared to make the call. Now the buck is at your desk. You have to make decisions that you didn’t have to before. You’re going to be involved in more political types of situations. More meetings. Some of those meetings are about things you aren’t passionate about, but you still have to go.

Participant 3:

I would say to make sure you understand the demands of the positions are different. The principal position will take you away from the love of athletics. If that’s why you were an AD, you won’t appreciate it. You can still go watch events, but you aren’t going to be just focusing on that. Eyes are on you in a different way. Your responsibilities are different now. A lot of people love athletics, and that’s why they do the AD spot. The principal and administrative role is just different now.

Participant 4:

The buck stops with you. Be ready to deal with larger problems that mean much more than athletics. You’ve got to be able to work under pressure, and you’ve got to be a good leader to get people to do what you want. I also think it’s important to be open to change yourself and take advice from others. Listen to others.

Participant 5:

I think one thing that a lot of people don’t understand is that an AD has a lot of nights, but a principal has them as well, plus more. Principals have music concerts, plays, everything that goes on. ADs don’t have all that. You have to have an understanding family. My wife always tells me that I picked this. I’m sick and tired of a play on the fourth night in a row. The sacrifices your family has to make are huge. I don’t live near school, so it’s tough on my family. You’ve got to be willing to get out of bed and be present. It’s a lot, but I would do it all over again.

Participant 6:

I think you have to ask yourself what is it that you exactly want to do,  and why would you leave the AD role for a principal position. Is it that you are motivated and really want to be associated with leading a building? Or is it about getting out of the AD role? If you think it’s going to be easier as principal, I don’t know if that was correct or should be your reason. If you don’t have interest in dealing with data or student academic achievement, [don’t make the transition]. You know, my spouse is an AD and she doesn’t always like it, but she has no desire to be a principal. She loves her job, but there’s just moments when she doesn’t like it. It’s great when it’s tournament time. On a day like today when there’s no events, it’s not very glamorous. Being a building principal, you know, there’s not a whole lot of glamorous stuff. You get to prep for graduation and scholarship night, but it’s not the same. You’ve got to be certain about why you’re doing it. If it’s for the wrong reasons, you’re not going to be happy.

George Minoso2025-03-26T15:53:42-05:00

Bridging Practice and Pedagogy: The Role of Practitioners as Professors in Higher Education

George Minoso2025-03-26T15:53:42-05:00May 2nd, 2025|Contemporary Sports Issues, Research, Sport Education, Sports Management|

Bridging Practice and Pedagogy: The Role of Practitioners as Professors in Higher Education

Abstract

Many smaller institutions are seeing an uptick in students interested in obtaining degrees in the more applied fields.  For the applied fields, there is a distinct benefit to having practitioners move into the role of professor as a “second career.”  The value of this approach has been recognized in fields such as public policy, education, and nursing for quite some time (He, et. al 2022; LaRocco & Bruns, 2006; Ritter, 2007).  These practitioners bring not only the content expertise, but also the depth and credibility to draw the connection between theory and practice for the students. The concept of practitioners as professors has yet to be studied in business and sport management programs.  The use of practitioners in the field of accounting and finance has been examined as a means to combat the shortage of doctorates in the field, but not to a great extent (Boyle, et. Al, 2013).  The research on “second career academics” (LaRocco & Bruns, 2006) has predominately been centered on the challenges the individuals face when moving from the corporate to academic environment.  This study is aimed at understanding the trends in business and sport management programs with respect to hiring practitioners into full time professorship positions. 

Keywords: Second career academics, practitioner professors, business, sport management, professional experience, faculty hiring trends, accreditation impact, student learning outcomes, networking opportunities, faculty recruitment

Introduction

The study will examine the number of professors with professional experience as practitioners in their fields prior to entering the academic world.  While textbooks are great tools, they cannot replace the experiences that professional practitioners encounter. The research will use survey methodologies to get an understanding of the status of practitioners in sport management and business programs in the United States.  As a second phase to the research, we hope to uncover the motivations for moving into academic and to better understand the challenges and rewards for making such a transition.  Future research will also be centered on potential tensions that might exist between the first career academics and the second career academics (practitioners) (Clinebell & Clinebell, 2008). We hypothesize that there is an increasing number of business and sport management programs employing practitioners into professorship positions. 

Literature Review

While there is some previous research that focuses on aspects of this study, there is a lack of focus in previous studies on institution size and accreditation status in relation to second career academics. However, there were many studies that focused on the move towards hiring second career academics, doctoral shortages in certain business fields, and overall collaboration in the business world.  It seems that the pendulum in business schools is moving towards hiring more professors that have been practitioners previously (Clinebell & Clinebell, 2008).

In our careers as professors, we have seen many changes in students, and in what the business world expects of them.  Interpersonal and intrapersonal skills which are components of Emotional Intelligence (EI) are something that many employers now want (Manna, et. Al, 2017).   This may largely be because business in our world today is incredibly complex and constantly in flux.  Communication skills are a key to reaching high levels of career success (Manna, et. Al, 2017).   For example, preparing reports and various financial statements may have been enough for an individual to be successful in the past in the accounting field, but that is not necessarily the case today (Manna, et. Al, 2017).   Due to the overall nature of business, it is increasingly important that the hybrid and clinical aspects of business be incorporated into business education (Clinebell & Clinebell, 2008). 

Another issue facing sport management and business schools is a shortage of faculty that have their doctoral degree (Clinebell & Clinebell, 2008).  With that being said, for institutions to survive and thrive in the educational environment important steps need to be made. Effective and impactful learning requires collaboration between professors and students.  Even further collaboration such as between managers, educators, and researchers could be beneficial as well (Sohrabi & Zarghi, 2015).   Networking with the local community and creating employee culture that fosters collaboration between first and second career academics are both important (Clinebell & Clinebell, 2008).  In collaborating with the community good relationships can also be built with various business entities.  According to a study conducted by Henningsson and Geschwind (2017), both local and top management agree that adjunct professors who are industry practitioners can help increase collaboration as well as quality of education.

Accreditation is a peer-to-peer arrangement relying on volunteerism by higher education professionals to pledge to students that the education offered by universities is of great excellence and value.  The accreditation process leans on the openness of universities to assess themselves against a set of policies, procedures, and standards to recognize strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats while using the accreditation process for improvement in these areas (Brittingham, 2009).  For sport management programs the Commission of Sport Management Accreditation (COSMA) uses myriad of criteria, such as outcome assessments, strategic planning, curriculum, faculty qualifications, scholarly and professional activities, educational resources, and internal and external relationships (stakeholders such as alumni) to gauge the rigor of quality (COSMA, 2024). Accreditation has evolved over time to link federal financial aid to accreditation status and monitor both qualitative and quantitative outcomes.  The achievement of accredited status is frequently used to assess the quality of an academic program (Hobbs, McMahan, Stawski, 2018).  The utilization of second career academics can be of great value during the accreditation process as these individuals are versed in the professional needs of the industry.  In addition, second career academics may have the external relationships needed to facilitate a successful accreditation review.

The changes in student demographics also raise questions about equitable access to high-quality education, which presents more challenges for university professors and accrediting agencies. Utilizing practitioners in higher education classrooms can be instrumental in mitigating some of these challenges.  By providing students with more direct and consistent access to those that have been in the field can prove beneficial in preparing students for careers in those industries.  Second career academics again are likely to have access to networks that can assist students as they prepare to enter the workforce in that field.

The lack of previous research and the need to address current challenges facing sport management and business programs have provided the foundation for the research questions examined in this exploratory study.  The research questions were devised to better understand the current state of utilizing second career academics in sport management and business programs.

RQ1: To what extent does the size of the institution impact the hiring of second career academics?

• H1: Smaller institutions will hire second career academics more frequently.
• H2: Smaller institutions will actively recruit second career faculty.

RQ2: To what extent does program accreditation impact the recruitment of second career academics?

• H1: Programs that are not accredited will actively recruit second career faculty to a higher degree

RQ3: To what extent does accreditation status impact the hiring of second career academics?

• H1: Institutions that are accredited will have fewer second career academics.

RQ4: To what extent does the institution have barriers to second career academics for career advancement

• H1: Institutions that are accredited will not have advancement opportunities for faculty without a terminal degree.
• H2: Smaller institutions will have advancement opportunities for faculty without a terminal degree.

Method

The study was designed as an exploratory study to a larger research effort centered on uncovering the benefits to students of having second career academics as faculty in their programs. Currently, little research exists on the hiring practices of second career academics in the sport management and business fields. A survey was developed to investigate the prevalence (or lack of) of faculty in programs that are considered second career academics. The 12 questions on the survey were used to gather information on the size of the institution and their practices around recruiting and hiring second career academics. The survey also included questions about advancement opportunities for second career academics in higher education institutions. Initially, a convenience sample was selected of 62 institutions. As the initial response rate was low, the survey was then distributed through the Commission on Sport Management Accreditation (COSMA) membership list. A total of 22 responses were collected. Although a high response rate was not achieved, this data does provide insight into current hiring trends and provides a solid foundation for future research.

Results and Discussion

The data from the survey were analyzed using Microsoft Excel. As the dataset was small, hypotheses were evaluated using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. The institutions that responded were from a variety of locations in the United States and were of varying size and type (private, public). For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that the Sport Management and Business programs were in the same department, which was a limitation that is discussed later in the paper.

RQ1 examined the impact of size of the institution on the hiring of second career academics. Many smaller institutions are seeing an uptick in students interested in obtaining degrees in the more applied fields. For the applied fields, there is a distinct benefit to having practitioners move into the role of professor as a “second career.”  The value of this approach has been recognized in fields such as public policy, education, and nursing for quite some time (He, et. Al 2022; LaRocco & Bruns, 2006; Ritter, 2007). The use of practitioners in the field of accounting and finance has been examined as a means to combat the shortage of doctorates in the field, but not (Boyle, et. Al, 2013). A general size of the institution can be inferred from the number of faculty and students in the programs. Table 1 summarizes the data related to the relative size of the program based on the number of faculty and number of students.

Table 1: Size of programs in terms of faculty and number of students
	M	SD
1. Total number of FT faculty in business and sport management	7.64	9.08
2. Total number of PT faculty in business and sport management	6.50	0.71
3. Total number of students in business and sport management – undergrad	185.00	87.61
4. Total number of students in business and sport management – graduate	56.55	40.81
5. Total number of faculty (FT and PT) that are “second career academics”	9.50	12.03

The number of FT faculty varied considerably. The median was 4, but the responses ranged from a high of 42 to a low of 1. There was more consistency with PT faculty. 23% of the institutions reported having more PT faculty than FT time faculty. These programs were the smaller programs in the data set in terms of the number of students. The size of the programs in terms of students was quite varied as well. The median number of undergraduate students was 180 with the highest being 750 and the lowest being 55. The median number of graduate students was 40, with the highest at 130 students and the lowest at 7 students. Eleven (50%) of the institutions did not have graduate programs. Finally, the average number of second career academics (FT and PT) across the sample was 9.5 with a high of 30 and a low of 1. Of particular note was that none of the institutions reported having no faculty that were second career academics.

H1 postulated that smaller institutions would hire second career faculty members more frequently. To assess this, a correlation between the number of students in the program (combined undergraduate and graduate) and the number of second career academics reported in the department was determined. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient was 0.739 (p <.0001) and thus supported H1.

H2 predicted that smaller institutions would also specifically recruit second career academics for their programs. The correlation between the total number of students and whether the institution actively seeks out second career academics was 0.522 (p = 0.013). H2 was supported showing that smaller institutions actively recruit second career academics to a higher degree than larger institutions.

RQ2 centered on the impact of accreditation and the relationship to actively recruiting second career academics in sport management and business programs. Of the responses, there was a near equal split between institutions that were not accredited by an outside accrediting body such as AASCB or COSMA (9) and those that were currently accredited (10). Three institutions were in the accreditation process at the time of the survey.

H1 stated programs that are not accredited are more likely to actively recruit second career academics. The correlation coefficient between accreditation status (n=19 because 3 were in process) and whether or not the institution reported that they actively recruited second career academics was 0.056 and therefore H1 was not supported. From this data set, there is no evidence that accreditation status impacts the recruiting of second career academics.

RQ3 examined the impact of accreditation status on the hiring of second career academics. Institutions that do not actively recruit second career academics may still find that through their search process they tend to hire more frequently second career academics.

H1 stated that institutions that area accredited will have fewer second career faculty in their programs. This contention was not supported by the data collected (r = 0.253; p = 0.298).

Although not the focus of this paper, size of the institution does appear to have an impact on accreditation status although not statistically significant (r = 0.441; p = 0.06). Larger institutions are more likely to be accredited than smaller programs.

RQ4 investigated the barriers to career advancement that second career academics sometimes face. The research on “second career academics” has been centered on the challenges the individuals face when moving from the corporate to academic environment (Clinebell & Clinebell, 2008; LaRocco & Bruns, 2006).

H1 postulates that institutions that are accredited will not have career advancement opportunities for faculty without terminal degrees. In this study, it was assumed that second career academics do not have terminal degrees. This presents a distinct limitation that will be discuss later it the paper. Of the total sample, 41% of the institutions did not offer promotion opportunities for faculty without terminal degrees. When comparing accreditation status to promotion opportunities for those without terminal degrees, there was no relationship between the two (r = 0.045; p = 0.855). H1 was not supported. Of the sample only 2 of the institutions (9%) offered tenure opportunities for faculty without terminal degrees. Finally, participants were asked if their institution allowed faculty on term contracts to move to tenure track if a terminal degree was obtained. When comparing accreditation status to the offering of moving to a tenure track position, there was some evidence that those that were accredited offered this option, although not statistically significant (r = 0.367; p = 0.123).

H2 examined the impact of the size of the institution on the promotion opportunities for faculty without terminal degrees. Smaller programs might be less likely to be accredited and therefore better able to hire faculty without terminal degrees. Offering career advancement opportunities could be easier to implement in smaller institutions. The correlation between size of the institutions as measured by the total number of students and promotion opportunities for faculty without terminal degrees was 0.140 (p = 0.535). No statistically significant relationships were found between the size of the institution and tenure opportunity or the ability to switch to tenure track. Therefore, H2 was not supported. This small sample did not offer any evidence that the size of the institution impacted the career advancement opportunities for faculty without terminal degrees.

Study Limitations

Although some interesting findings were obtained, the study had several limitations. The most obvious limitation was the sample size. With only 22 responses, in-depth analysis was limited. However, as an exploratory study, this research does offer some key insights to build a more robust research agenda on the subject of second career academics. Next, the size of the institution was estimated using the number of students and the number of FT and PT faculty in the programs. This does not necessarily offer a good measure of the size of the institution as a whole. A better measure might be size of the institutional endowment, total student population across campus(es), or total number of faculty at the institution. Another measure to add for additional analysis would be the type of institution (private versus public). In this study, it was assumed that the business and sport management programs were in the same department or school. This is not always the case and many anecdotal comments on the survey mentioned that the departments are completely separate. Finally, this research assumed that second career academics did not have terminal degrees. This may not be the case and therefore provides an additional avenue for future research to explore.

Future Research

This topic presents many areas for additional study. Firstly, a more comprehensive study with a larger sample size could be conducted to provide more in-depth analysis of the trends in higher education with respect to second career academics. This could extend beyond the sport management and business fields into additional applied fields. Future research could be centered on determining whether second career academics have terminal degrees or plan to obtain terminal degrees and their motivation for doing so (i.e., can switch to tenure track). As a second phase to this research, we hope to uncover the motivations for moving into academia and to better understand the challenges and rewards for making such a transition. Additionally, we will research potential tensions that might exist between the first career academics and the second career academics (practitioners) (Clinebell & Clinebell, 2008). Finally, future research could be centered on the benefits to students and the value these practitioners bring into the classroom.

Conclusion

In conclusion, in order for practical application purposes, institutions could influence and tailor curriculum to the practitioners’ level of expertise and/or vice versa.  Institutions can link second career academics with students, to promote professional networking and experiential learning.  Universities could collaborate with practitioners to create internship/project opportunities, networking or informational interviews that would add more hands-on experiences and opportunities.  Senior faculty could implement student feedback loops to evaluate the effectiveness of practitioner led courses thus refining teaching strategies and enriching student learning outcomes.  These approaches could uplift educational quality, opportunities and better prepare students for their careers.

References

George Minoso2025-07-08T10:57:33-05:00

The Association Between Pitch Accuracy and Batter Outcomes in Major League Baseball

George Minoso2025-07-08T10:57:33-05:00April 19th, 2025|General, Research, Sports Coaching, Sports Health & Fitness|

Authors: Benjamin E. Napoli,¹ Daniel A. Napoli,¹ Anthony M. Napoli MD MHL¹, Timmy R Lin PhD¹, Macall S. Robertson JD, Jason Machan PhD,¹ Janette Baird PhD¹

¹Department of Emergency Medicine, Alpert Medical School of Brown University

Editor’s Note: This article’s formatting was corrected on July 8, 2025. All tables, figures, and appendices are now present in the article.

Abstract

Purpose: Pitch speed is considered synonymous with pitching success. In years past, the accuracy of a pitch was paramount but in recent years this has been deprioritized as compared with pitch speed. Over the years, batters have adapted to higher pitching speeds so pitch strategy and placement may be more important.  Our hypothesis was that pitching accuracy associated with intended pitch location would be a significant factor in pitching success in Major League Baseball (MLB).  

Methods: To study this, we studied multiple facets of a pitch, including pitch accuracy, to assess the association between pitch accuracy and batter outcome in over 1000 at bats in over 20 randomly selected games during the 2022 MLB season.  Our primary goal was to determine if there was an association between pitch accuracy, after controlling for confounders, and batting average against (BAA) and slugging percentage (SLG). 

Results: We found that at bats in which the last pitch hit the intended spot reduced batter success by greater than 50%.  Higher pitching speed was not associated with success partly because it was associated with lower accuracy. If a pitch was accurate, after adjusting for other variables, it was 3.28 times more likely to be successful. 

Conclusions: This study demonstrates that pitching accuracy is a highly important skill in determining the success of pitchers, beyond that of other traditional pitching features.  Future studies to automate this work and integrate machine learning and predictive modeling could be used to optimize pitcher success or identify the most accurate pitchers.

Applications in Sport: This study demonstrates that pitching accuracy is a critical determinant of success in Major League Baseball (MLB), with accurate pitches reducing batter success rates, including batting average and slugging percentage, by over 50%. While pitch speed has traditionally been prioritized, this research highlights that accuracy has a far greater impact on outcomes, as accurate pitches are more than three times as likely to succeed. These findings challenge the current emphasis on velocity, suggesting that focusing on accuracy could optimize performance and reduce injury risks for pitchers.

Introduction:

In recent years, hitting and pitching analytics have been used extensively to study talent and study what makes a successful pitcher or hitter. For pitchers, these features can include pitch movement, pitcher mechanics,(Manzi et al., 2022) pitch selection, pitch types, and spin rate.(Whiteside et al., 2016)  While pitch speed has continued to increase(Cooper, 2020) and batters have adjusted, these other features become increasingly important.  An ideal pitcher would have peak velocity and accuracy but having both is not easy to obtain.(Venkadesan & Mahadevan, 2017) 

Pitch accuracy in common baseball parlance is often referred to as whether the pitcher “hits his spot.”  Hitting or missing the spot refers to the intended pitch location indicated by the catcher.  Before each pitch, catchers set their glove for the intended pitch location.  While there are some observational studies of pitch accuracy over different levels of baseball,(Kawamura et al., 2017) in the modern era there is no published study to indicate just how much of an effect accurate pitching has on batter performance.

Our hypothesis was that a significant difference in hitter outcomes will exist between pitchers who “hit his spot” (are within 6 inches of the intended pitch location) and those who do not.  A secondary outcome of our study was to examine whether pitch accuracy had a greater association with batter outcome than pitch selection, location, or speed.

Methods:

This was a retrospective study of 17 randomly selected games during the 2022 Major League Baseball (MLB) Season.  Investigators used a pre-specified Google Form (Mountain View, CA) with all key pitcher, pitch, and batter outcomes identified.  The investigators documented the outcome of the last pitch of each at bat.  This is consistent with current MLB methods of determining measures like batting average against (BAA) as it is the only pitch in the at bat in which the batter is forced to make a decision that will result in an at bat outcome. BAA and Slugging Percentage (SLG) were calculated using standardly accepted methodology (BAA = H/AB; SLG = (1B + 2Bx2 + 3Bx3 + HRx4)/AB).

An a priori sample size estimate based upon an estimated effect size of a 20-point decrease in BAA indicated a need to study approximately 1700 at bats.  An interim analysis of effect was planned at 500 and 1000 at bats. One game from each MLB team’s 2022 season was randomly selected until the study was complete.  Data abstractors were blind to the study results.  Data collection included pitcher handedness, pitch speed, intended pitch location, pitch type, and outcome.  As is customary for measuring BAA, only the last pitch of an at bat was used in this study.  

Our primary outcome was to demonstrate that a significant difference will exist between accurate pitches, “hit his spot” (estimated to be within 6 inches of the intended pitch location) and inaccurate pitches (“missed his spot”).  The secondary outcomes were to study if pitch speed, pitch selection, or pitch location had an impact on pitcher success.  Statistical analysis was done using SAS 9.4 (Cary, N.C.). We report on median with interquartile range (IQR) and proportions with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).  Direct comparisons of unadjusted data were completed using a Chi-square test for proportions while a logistic regression was used to adjust for all variables associated with pitching accuracy.  A definitions table can be found in the Appendix due to the number of abbreviated outcomes.   

Results:

Primary Outcome:

The results of the interim analysis at 1000 at bats demonstrated a significant effect of pitch accuracy on BAA and SLG.   Of these 1000 at bats, represented by 17 randomly selected MLB games, the pitching accuracy was 45.3% (95% CI: 42.2% – 48.4%) and median pitch speed was 91 (IQR: 85 – 94) miles per hour.  The top three pitch types thrown were the fastball (31.8%), sinker (21.4%), and slider (19.5%) [Table 1].  Nearly 66% of pitches targeted low in the zone [Table 2]. Overall outcome (BAA and SLG) as it relates to pitch accuracy can be found in Table 3. 

Unadjusted analysis for the primary outcome of BAA and SLG demonstrated pitch accuracy was a significant predictor of pitcher success.  At bats ending in a pitch that hit the intended spot reduced batter success by greater than 50%; accurate pitches resulted in a BAA and SLG of 0.166 and 0.343 vs. 0.262 and 0.558 for inaccurate pitches, p<0.01.   If a pitcher hits his spot, after adjusting for other variables, he was 3.28 times more likely to be successful. No other variable was significantly associated with the pitcher success in the adjusted model (Table 4).

Table 3: Pitch Accuracy and Batter Outcome

*See Appendix for index of abbreviations

Secondary Outcome

There was no relationship between pitch speed and accuracy though pitchers who threw in the 80’s miles per hour (mph) appeared more likely to be accurate than those in the 90’s mph [Figure 1]. There was no statistically significant difference in pitch accuracy and BAA or SLG between left-handed pitchers and right BAA and SLG as they relate to pitch type and pitch location can be found in Tables 5 and 6, respectively.

Unadjusted analysis demonstrated that sliders had the lowest BAA (0.190), while changeups had the highest (0.293) [Table 5]. Higher pitching speed was not significantly associated with preventing a hit (χ2 (5) = 9.9, p=.08) but was significantly associated with lower accuracy (χ2 (5) = 13.2, p=.02).  No other pitcher variable other than accuracy of intended location was significantly associated with pitcher success. 

Assuming an accurate pitch, then high-in (2.02) and high-middle (2.96) pitches were significantly more likely to be successful at hitting the spot than baseline comparison (middle-middle). All off-speed pitches except for curveballs were significantly more likely to be successful than their baseline comparator (the fastball) with odds ratios ranging from 1.6 (sinker) to 2.8 (slider) [Table 8].

Discussion:  

Success in pitching is a combination of many different features, including game situation, the batter, the pitcher, and the pitch.  However, pitch accuracy has always been considered one of the most important features of a pitcher until recently when much of the attention has turned to pitch speed.  This study sought to investigate the impact of pitching accuracy, specifically the ability to hit the location of an intended pitch, on the success of pitchers in MLB games.  While many features of a pitch can affect the outcome, few of them (if not none in our study) have the impact that accuracy has on batter outcome.  In fact, our study indicates an unadjusted reduction of nearly 50% in batting average and slugging percentage when pitchers hit their intended location with an adjusted odds ratio of 3.28.          

Sports analytics is a $2.7B industry that is expected to have a compound annual growth rate of more than 20% over the next ten years.(Research, 2022)  The sport of baseball has been one of the earliest adopters and the clearest example of successful use of baseball analytics. Though baseball is considered a team sport, it is in fact a series of sequential events and therefore lends itself to more precise statistical analyzation.(Bechtold, 2023)  This has led to the rise of slow-motion video, new metrics for pitch movement and success, and the development of whole analytics departments in all MLB teams.  This information has given rise to pitch location analysis, enhanced studying of the influence of framing of pitches by catchers, profiles of pitch spin and movement, comparative pitching analytics, and even the possibility of machine learning and predictive analytics for pitching. 

The success of a pitcher is affected by so many features of the pitcher and the batter.  In the pitcher alone, features like pitch speed, spin rate, and selection are important.(Manzi et al., 2022)  Even pitcher mechanics has an effect on pitch accuracy.(Venkadesan & Mahadevan, 2017)  Pitching mechanics gets refined over time and studies indicate pitchers have greater accuracy at higher performance levels.(Kawamura et al., 2017)  However, it is hard to quantify the importance of each of these features.   The common belief is that pitch speed dominates all other features of pitcher success.  However, one study that incorporated pitch speed was only able to show that the combination of pitch speed, refined special pitch release location, and variation in pitch selection accounted for only 22% of the variance in pitcher performance.(Whiteside et al., 2016)  Our study demonstrated a significant portion of variance in accuracy is explained by pitch speed (21.5%); the higher the pitch speed the less accurate the pitch.  Overall, the adjusted model demonstrated pitch speed did not affect pitch success as opposed to an accurate pitch being greater than three times more likely to be successful. 

This study relied upon retrospective review of a random sample of regular season games to determine the effect of pitch accuracy while simultaneously accounting for some of the most important, traditional features of pitching success – pitch speed, location, and selection.  Unadjusted analysis reinforced some of the common opinions about current pitching – sliders and splitters if placed correctly are some of the most difficult pitches to hit (Table 5) and pitches thrown over the middle of the plate are more likely to lead to batter success (Table 6).  However, it also demonstrated some unexpected outcomes – that fastballs were some of the least accurate pitches and that pitch speed had limited, if any, effect on batter outcome.  However, after adjustment some interesting associations were revealed.  Pitching high in the zone had an odds ratio of success consistently two times greater than the middle of the zone, and that pitching low in the zone was not associated with improved pitcher outcome.  While interesting, this is not entirely surprising as it follows the trend of pitchers throwing higher much more commonly than they once did as batters have adopted an upward sloping swing to maximize launch angle.(Gutwein, 2021; Lu Chen, 2022)   Additionally, almost all pitches were more successful than a fastball at getting a batter out; this too reflects the trend toward increasing use of off-speed pitches in the MLB.(Norris, 2023)  After adjustment, all these other features of commonly accepted pitching importance – speed, pitch selection, and pitch location had limited effect on the outcome of the pitch in comparison with pitch accuracy.  An accurate pitch was more than three times (OR 3.28, 95% CI 2.45-4.4) more likely to result in a favorable outcome and resulted in 50% reduction in batting average and slugging percentage. 

Any study that attempts to study one feature (pitch accuracy) amongst a number of complex other potential confounding factors is bound to have some limitations.  Complexity itself is a limitation. Though many of the variables (pitcher, game, time in the season, etc.) were randomized, the complexity offered by any one pitcher limits interpretation.  For example, certain pitchers may not offer certain pitches or the quality of their pitches varies as compared to another when pitching in one location.  Any study incorporating such features would be much more complex and would also limit real world real-time application.  The retrospective nature of this study would normally be a limitation, but it allowed specificity of pitch location due to the ability to review the video and record features of each pitch.  However, certain features of each pitch were not available to the investigators – like spin rate, lateral and vertical movement.  These features may have a role in determining pitcher accuracy as well as batter outcome independent of pitcher accuracy.  Lastly, any study involving individual review with a general goal of subjectively identifying whether a pitch was accurate runs the risk of consistent over-estimation or under-estimation and/or variation.  Only computerized video review algorithms would be able to reduce imprecision further.  Computer algorithms and machine learning may eventually be able to be incorporated to refine this work. 

Conclusion:

In conclusion, this study suggests that pitching accuracy, particularly hitting the intended location of a pitch, is a crucial factor in determining pitcher success in MLB.  The findings provide valuable insights into the relative importance of various pitching variables, emphasizing the significance of strategic accuracy over sheer pitching speed.  This study contributes to the ongoing discourse about the multifaceted nature of successful pitching in professional baseball and emphasizes the importance of one of the most important features of a successful pitcher – accuracy. 

Applications in Sport:

This study highlights the critical importance of pitching accuracy in Major League Baseball (MLB), demonstrating that accurate pitches significantly reduce batter success rates, with a 50% decrease in batting average and slugging percentage when pitchers “hit their spot.” While pitch speed has traditionally been emphasized, this research shows that higher speeds often reduce accuracy and have limited impact on outcomes compared to precise pitch placement. The findings suggest that prioritizing accuracy over speed could improve pitcher performance and reduce injury risks associated with the current focus on velocity. These insights could inform training strategies, analytics, and even machine learning applications to optimize pitching success, offering a shift in how pitching effectiveness is evaluated and developed in modern baseball.

George Minoso2025-03-26T12:17:32-05:00

Correlation Between Post-Injury Mental Health Symptoms and Rehabilitation Adherence in Collegiate Athletes

George Minoso2025-03-26T12:17:32-05:00April 4th, 2025|Sports Medicine|

Correlation Between Post-Injury Mental Health Symptoms and Rehabilitation Adherence in Collegiate Athletes

Purpose: To explore the correlation between post-injury mental health symptoms and rehabilitation adherence in collegiate athletes to gain knowledge that would improve rehabilitative recommendations. Methods: 19 National Collegiate Athletic Association athletes (M age: 20.58 ± 1.31) were assessed for depressive and anxious symptoms using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) after injury. Once they were cleared for full sports participation, they were administered the HADS again and the Rehabilitation Adherence Questionnaire (RAQ) to measure their perceptions of adherence to their rehabilitation programs. Results: A significant correlation was found between the two administrations of the HADS (R = .55, P = .03), but no significant correlations were found between RAQ scores and any of the HADS scores. Conclusions: Although the findings of this study did not establish a significant correlation between post-injury depression and anxiety symptoms and self-perceptions of rehabilitation adherence, strong evidence still exists to believe that poor mental health may be associated with poor rehabilitation adherence. Applications in Sport: Members of the collegiate athlete care team should be aware that the common underreporting of mental health symptoms in this population might make it difficult to establish the relationship between these symptoms and their recovery process after an injury. A holistic recovery approach should be considered in any injury recovery processes to allow collegiate athletes to heal both physically and psychologically.

Keywords: depression, anxiety, injury, recovery

Abbreviations: NCAA, National Collegiate Athletic Association; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; RAQ, Rehabilitation Adherence Questionnaire  
Introduction
Depression and anxiety remain as the leading mental health conditions among collegiate athletes, with as many as 30% and 50% of National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) athletes reporting depression and anxiety, respectively, in a 2011 survey from the National College Health Association (NCAA, 2024). More recently, the American College of Sports Medicine (2024), in their 2021 statement on mental health challenges for athletes, found that the prevalence for depression and/or anxiety in this population ranges between 25% to 35% and only 10% of collegiate athletes with a known mental health condition seek help from a mental health professional. The reasons for this prevalence are multi-faceted given that collegiate athletes often maintain a strong athletic identity that is reluctant to ask for help and are faced with the societal perception of athletes always having to be immensely resilient during all hardships (Chang et al., 2020; Sarac et al., 2018; Tomalski et al., 2019; Wayment et al., 2017; Weigard et al., 2012; Wolanin et al., 2016). Collegiate athletes balance academic demands with their time-intensive and stress-inducing athletic demands while encountering issues relevant to sexuality, gender, hazing, bullying, sexual misconduct, body image, and sport transition (Greenleaf et al., 2009; Petrie et al., 2008; Putukian, 2016). The notion that athletes may be at a decreased risk for mental health conditions due to increased levels of exercise and other personality traits that can aid in athletic success has been shown to be a misconception (Chang et al., 2020). Furthermore, collegiate athletes are exposed to an abundance of additional unique risk factors for depression and anxiety when compared to non-athlete collegiate student counterparts (Demirel, 2016; Ghaedi et al., 2014; Hagiwara et al., 2017; Hanton et al., 2013; McGuire et al., 2017).

Unfortunately, sports injury is an often unavoidable element of collegiate athletics participation, with approximately 40% to 50% of collegiate athletes sustaining at least 1 injury requiring either medical attention or a participation restriction during their careers (Yang et al., 2014b). Injuries such as ligamentous sprains, muscular strains, skeletal fractures, joint dislocations, and concussions are relatively common (Yang et al., 2014a). Sports injuries further aggrandize the preexisting symptoms of depression and anxiety present in collegiate athletes due to the fact that a sports injury may serve as potentially one of the most physically and emotionally disturbing events that a collegiate athlete may experience during their career. Injured collegiate athletes experience enhanced risk factors of depression and anxiety such as fear of reinjury, trouble sleeping, poor concentration, emotional numbness, and injury conversation avoidance (Li et al., 2017; Padaki et al., 2018). They utilize the coping mechanisms of unrealistic wishful thinking, unhealthy venting of emotions, denial, and behavior disengagement (Wadey et al., 2014). Additively, social stressors and financial stressors have also been shown to substantially grow post-injury in collegiate athletes (Evans et al., 2012). Despite these complications, however, collegiate athletes are often still expected to adhere to sports rehabilitation exercise programs for a full recovery and timely return-to-sport.

Sports rehabilitation exercise programs are only effective for collegiate athletes when they are closely adhering to the instructions provided to them by their rehabilitative healthcare provider (Torres et al., 2023a). Poor rehabilitation adherence may prolong recovery, enhance reinjury risk, and reduce the likelihood of positive patient outcomes upon return-to-sport (Jack et al., 2010). The salient post-injury symptoms of depression and anxiety play a role in reducing rehabilitation adherence and hindering injury recovery in collegiate athletes (Baez et al., 2023; Torres et al., 2023b). However, given that as many as 98.3% of injured collegiate athletes have been reported to either overadhere and underadhere to their rehabilitation programs, more contemporary evidence is needed to further understand this extent of this role (Granquist et al., 2014). Despite the recent progress in collegiate athlete mental health screening that has been made, rehabilitative healthcare providers of injured collegiate athletes may not yet be collectively appropriately aware of the symptoms of depression and anxiety in rehabilitation. The purpose of this study was to explore the correlation between post-injury depression and anxiety and rehabilitation adherence in collegiate athletes in an effort to gain knowledge that would improve recommendations for sports rehabilitation programs.
Methods

Sampling
The sampling in this study was limited to two collegiate institutions of varying NCAA competition levels (NCAA Division II and NCAA Division III) within the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States. Demographic information on age, sex, NCAA competition level, race/ethnicity, academic eligibility level, type of sport, and type of musculoskeletal injury was collected from all participants. Participants were recruited by their athletic trainers after a sports injury had occurred and were included based on being 18 years of age or older and sustaining an acute musculoskeletal sports injury that required the inability to engage in full sports participation for at least four weeks. The purpose of this four week requirement was to ensure that the injuries sustained were significant enough to require a rehabilitation program for at least a month (Shin et al., 2010). Collegiate athletes were excluded if they had a concussion, respiratory disease, metabolic disease, cardiac disease, autonomic nervous system disease, or chronic injury of an unknown origin.
Instrumentation

Zigmond and Snaith (1983) designed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) as a 14-item questionnaire to measure the symptoms of depression and anxiety. The HADS consists of two subscales that are constructed of seven items for symptoms of depression (HADS-D) and seven items for symptoms of anxiety (HADS-A). Each item contains responses that are individually scored on a scale from 0 to 3 with higher scores indicating a higher level of symptom frequency (i.e., not at all, sometimes, occasionally very often, nearly all the time, etc.). The combined score of emotional distress (sum of HADS-A and HADS-D) ranges from 0 to 42 with scores of 11 or higher indicating a potential for a clinically significant mood disorder case. The total score of each participant places them into one of the following categories: non-case/normal (0 – 7), borderline case/borderline abnormal (8-10), case/abnormal (11 – 21+). Correlations ranging from .76 to .41 for the seven anxiety items (P < .01) and from .60 to .30 for the seven depression items (P < .02) have been associated with this instrument (Zigmond & Snaith, 1983). Similarly, calculated Spearman correlations between subscale scores and confirmed psychiatric ratings have shown that R = .70 for HADS-D and R = .74 for HADS-A (P < .001). The HADS has been routinely established as an instrument that performs well in assessing the symptom severity and caseness of depression and anxiety in both psychiatric and primary care patients and the general population (including collegiate athletes) (Bjelland et al., 2002).

RAQ
Fisher et al. (1988) designed the Rehabilitation Adherence Questionnaire (RAQ) as a 40-item questionnaire to measure rehabilitation adherence, while Shin et al. (2010) later redeveloped the RAQ into a 25-item questionnaire and validated it for injured athletes. The RAQ consists of six subscales: support from significant others (five items), pain tolerance (five items), scheduling (four items), self-motivation (five items), perceived exertion (three items), and environmental conditions (three items), and participants using the RAQ rate their level of agreement to each item using a four-point scale (i.e., 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree). The responses to each statement are then summed for a total adherence score that can range from 25 – 100. Higher total adherence scores indicate that participants perceive themselves successfully adhering to and completing their rehabilitation programs as prescribed by their rehabilitative healthcare provider. Moderate to high intra-class correlation coefficients for the each of the six subscales (support from significant others = .81, pain tolerance = .64, scheduling = .72, self-motivation = .78, perceived exertion = .67, and environmental conditions = .82; P < .01) have been found for this instrument, thus indicating a high level of test-retest reliability within the RAQ (Shin et al.).

Data Collection
A non-experimental repeated-measures prospective cohort study design was used in the completion of this study. Human subjects research approval was provided from the East Stroudsburg University Institutional Review Board (protocol #ESU-IRB-041-2021) in March of 2021, with the data collecting period for this study starting in June of 2021 and ending in February of 2022. After an in-season sports injury had occurred, collegiate athletes who met the appropriate inclusion criteria were approached by their athletic trainer for voluntary participation in this study through the provision of an electronic informed consent form on their first full day of starting their rehabilitation programs. The collegiate athletes were made aware that their involvement in this study would not have any effect on their status as a student-athlete at their respective institution. Once enrolled in the study, the participants were asked to complete the HADS to measure their current post-injury depression and anxiety symptoms. Participants were then monitored throughout the duration of their rehabilitation programs until they received clearance for full sports participation from either their team physician and/or athletic trainer (i.e., at return-to-play). On the day this clearance was attained, the HADS was administered again as well as the RAQ to measure their self-perceptions of their adherence to their rehabilitation programs. All questionnaires in this study were administered through Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) compliant Google Forms on either a password-protected tablet, smartphone, or computer desktop with all collected data being deidentified, kept confidential, and stored in a password-encrypted computer.

Data Analysis
The IBM SPSS 27.0 Statistical Package was used to analyze all collected data once the data collection period was complete. Descriptive statistics were reported and Pearson product-moment correlation tests with a significance level of P < .05 were conducted among HADS and RAQ scores to attempt to further identify the relationships between post-injury depression and anxiety and rehabilitation adherence in collegiate athletes. The following criteria were used to interpret R values: little to no relationship (.00–.25), fair relationship (.25–.50), moderate to good relationship (.50–.75), and good to excellent relationship (above .75) (Portney & Watkins, 2009).
Results

The 19 participants (M age: 20.58 ± 1.31; 17 males, 2 females) in this study were primarily NCAA Division II student-athletes (73.7%), White Caucasian (63.2%), academic seniors (42.1%), and football athletes (63.2%). The participants sustained various musculoskeletal conditions such as foot/ankle injuries (36.8%), knee injuries (21.1%), hip/thigh injuries (21.1%), and shoulder injuries (21.1%) with three participants not being cleared for a return to full sports participation at the conclusion of the data collection period. The cleared participants (n = 16) took 96.63 ± 31.90 days to recover from their sustained injuries before they were cleared for full sports participation. For the completion of the post-injury HADS (i.e., HADS 1 administration), the participants (n = 19) scored an 11.58 ± 5.26, while for the completion of the return-to-play HADS (i.e., HADS 2 administration), the participants (n = 16) scored a 9.63 ± 5.83. The participants (n = 15) rated their self-perception of rehabilitation adherence to be 57.20 ± 4.95 on a scale of 25 to 100 using the RAQ. A significant positive correlation was found between HADS 1 and HADS 2 scores (R = .55, P = .03), but no significant correlations were found between RAQ and HADS 1 scores (R = .52, P = .85) or RAQ and HADS 2 scores (R = .14, P = .63).

Discussion
The mean scores of both HADS 1 and HADS 2 falling above the asymptomatic normal HADS category indicates that depressive and anxious symptoms remain a substantial presence for collegiate athletes at post-injury and return-to-play states. Furthermore, although the findings of this study did not establish a significant correlation between post-injury depression and anxiety symptoms and self-perceptions of rehabilitation adherence, there is still strong existing evidence from previous researchers to believe that poor mental health may be associated with poor rehabilitation adherence. Holt et al. (2019) organized a literature review of 34 studies on the topic of adherence to exercise therapy interventions in children and adolescents with musculoskeletal conditions among 6 different databases. The selected studies represented 1,563 participants (35% male, 65% female, 2-19 years old), 11 musculoskeletal conditions, and multiple exercise interventions. Commonly identified barriers to rehabilitation adherence in this review included time constraints, physical environment (location), and previous negative exercise experiences. Holt et al. concluded that a diversity of barriers and facilitators to exercise therapy for musculoskeletal conditions exist and current strategies to boost adherence are not consistent with contemporarily identified barriers and facilitators. They clinically referenced that making exercise enjoyable, social, and convenient may be important to maximizing rehabilitation adherence to exercise therapy in young, injured athletes.

Jack et al. (2010) developed a systematic review of 22 articles reporting on 20 independent cohort studies using the ADMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PUBMED, PSYCINFO, SPORTDISCUS, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PEDro databases to understand the barriers to treatment adherence in physiotherapy outpatient clinics. These researchers identified high quality studies that maintained a focus on the exploration of rehabilitation adherence in patients with musculoskeletal conditions. They found that there was strong evidence to indicate that poor treatment adherence was associated with low levels of physical activity at baseline or in previous weeks, low in-treatment adherence with exercise, low self-efficacy, depression, anxiety, helplessness, poor social support, greater number of perceived barriers to exercise, and increased pain levels during exercise. They also found that the research focused on the ability of health professionals and health organizations to address these barriers was comparatively limited. Holt et al. (2019) and Jack et al. would agree that symptoms of depression and anxiety may negatively influence rehabilitation adherence and that future study on the barriers to rehabilitation adherence is essential to the development of useful interventions by sports medicine professionals and other healthcare providers.

Brewer et al. (2013) studied the predictors of adherence to home rehabilitation exercises following ACL reconstruction in a study of 91 (58 males, 33 females) post-operative patients. These patients completed measures of athletic identity, neuroticism, optimism, and pessimism before ACL surgery and measures of daily pain, negative mood, stress, and home exercise completion for 42 days postoperatively. These researchers found that their participants reported high levels of adherence to the prescribed exercise regimen and that the participants completed fewer home exercises on days when they experience more stress or negative moods. They concluded that day-to-day variations in negative mood and stress may contribute to adherence to prescribed home exercises. This conclusion may be generalizable to athletic training settings in collegiate athletics, as past studies have supported the presence of poor rehabilitation adherence by student-athletes in these settings (Granquist et al, 2014; Fisher et al., 1988).

Evans et al. (2012) researched the stressors experienced by injured athletes during the 3 phases of their recovery from sports injury (onset, rehabilitation, return to play) and the differences in the stressors experienced by team-sport athletes as compared to individual-sport athletes with the use of semi structured interviews. The sample in this study consisted of 5 previously injured high-level rugby players and five previously injured high-level golfers. These researchers found that the athletes in their study experienced sport, medical/physical, and social and financial stressors; they also found that these same athletes reported several differences in the stressors experienced across the 3 phases of injury recovery and between team and individual-sport athletes. These researchers stressed that their findings have important implications for the design and implementation of interventions aimed at managing the potentially stressful sport injury experience and facilitating the return of injured athletes to competitive sport. This research supports the notion that certain psychosocial components of sports injury affect the ability of collegiate athletes to return to sports participation without any limitations.

Wadey et al. (2014) explored the relationship between re-injury anxiety and return-to-play outcomes in a cross-sectional research study of 335 collegiate athletes (M age = 23.5 ± 6.6) from varying NCAA competition levels. The athletes in this study completed the RIA-RE subscale of the Reinjury Anxiety Inventory (RIAI) as an assessment of reinjury anxiety and the Return to Sport After Serious Injury Questionnaire (RSSIQ) as an assessment of the perceptions of athletes on returning to sport. These researchers also assessed the presence of coping strategies in these athletes with the use of the Crocker and Graham MCOPE measure. They found a positive relationship between re-injury anxiety and heightened return concerns (R = .62, P < .01) and significant indirect effects for coping were found for wishful thinking, venting of emotions, denial, and behavioral disengagement. They suggested that future researchers should continue to examine the relationship between anxiety and return-to-play outcomes using diverse methodologies.

Conclusions
With the premise that poor mental health may be correlated to poor rehabilitation adherence, it is reasonable to suggest that rehabilitative healthcare providers should have an invested interest in utilizing effective psychosocial interventions within their programming when treating injured collegiate athletes. Additionally, they should re-evaluate their own mental health screening practices to ensure that they are screening for appropriate mental health symptoms at baseline, at post-injury, and at return-to-play, as this is now considered best practice (Baez & Jochimsen, 2023). Rehabilitative healthcare providers should also be keenly aware of the fact that underreporting and a proven reluctance to ask for help in this population may play a role in masking certain symptoms through the entire rehabilitative process. These same elements may have also played a role as to why a relationship was not established between post-injury depression and anxiety symptoms and self-perceptions of rehabilitation adherence in this study. Other study limitations, including a small, predominantly White and male sample, timing and scheduling issues in the athletic training facility, and a lack of standardization when it came to the rehabilitation programs prescribed by the athletic trainers, could also have impacted the results. Future researchers should seek to create similar studies with much larger, diverse sample sizes that explore correlations between the individual subscales of HADS-D and HADS-A and the self-perceptions of rehabilitation adherence of collegiate athletes.

Applications in Sport
Members of the collegiate athlete care team, such as coaches, athletic trainers, and other healthcare providers, should be aware that the common underreporting of mental health symptoms in this population might make it difficult to establish the relationship between these symptoms and their recovery process after an injury. A holistic recovery approach should be considered in any injury recovery processes to allow collegiate athletes to heal both physically and psychologically. Despite their inability to sometimes be vulnerable and transparent in reporting, collegiate athletes clearly struggle with their mental health and more research is needed to better understand how the more nuanced aspects of depressive, anxious, and disordered eating symptomatology affect them while they are recovering from a sports injury. The best collegiate athletic environments are those that permit collegiate athletes to report any and all mental health symptoms, concerns, and crises without any fear of consequences stemming from coaches and other relevant personnel.

George Minoso2025-02-14T15:26:23-06:00

In Their Own Voices: Factors Effecting Collegiate Hockey Player Use and Perception of Mental Skills

George Minoso2025-02-14T15:26:23-06:00March 21st, 2025|Sport Training, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|

Author: Elia Burbidge

Author: ¹ Elia Burbidge

Elia Burbidge is a Doctoral Student in Sport and Exercise Psychology at Springfield College. Springfield, MA.

ABSTRACT 

Mental skills use and perceptions of their effectiveness in collegiate level athletes have been studied extensively in sport psychology. The usage of mental skills has been deemed effective overall and in collegiate settings. That said, little research has investigated hockey players’ perceptions of mental performance. Due in part to the unique culture of hockey there is a need to study hockey players’ perceptions of, and influences on the use of, mental skills. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the perceptions and usage of mental skills in collegiate hockey players, along with perceptions of how hockey culture impacts these beliefs through interviews with current college hockey players. Semi-structured interviews of six collegiate hockey players took place. Findings from these interviews suggest that level of play, exposure, and hockey culture largely impact how participants use and perceive mental training. These findings also suggest that some collegiate hockey players may be using psychological strategies without having been deliberately taught these strategies. 

Key Words: psychological strategies, hockey culture, college athletics 

INTRODUCTION 

The effectiveness of mental training has consistently been shown in both research and applied settings (6, 10, 21, 23, 26, 33, 34).  A recent meta-analysis by Lochbaum et al. (26) indicated that using mental skills positively impacts performance, with mindfulness, task cohesion, and self-efficacy having the largest positive mean effect sizes.    

Despite evidence that mental skills training and mental health interventions increase performance, athletes often neglect the development of psychological skills (12, 19). Athletes are hesitant to work with a sport psychology professional in part due to common misperceptions related to masculine stigmas, lack of knowledge about sport psychology, and the tangibility of results (5, 10, 16, 19, 27, 40).  Findings indicate that hesitancy can stem from past experiences with sport psychology professionals (SPPs), demographics (gender, age), and participation in a masculine or more physical sport where injury is common, and where the social role of a male athlete is stigmatized (27, 16). This supports previously found conclusions that reflect a greater hesitancy from male athletes to seek help from an SPP than female athletes (27, 28). Furthermore, personal openness, playing a team versus individual sport, and preferences of a consultant based on the same or similar cultural background contribute to overall perceptions of working with an SPP and using mental skills (5, 14, 20, 27, 28, 39). Additionally, Fortin-Guichard et al. (14) found that athletes’ perceptions and understanding of sport psychology or SPPs are often confused with the role of a psychiatrist or therapist, with the perception of offered services rooted in clinical psychology.  

Research has also indicated that NCAA athletes are often likely to view the benefits of a psychological skills training (PST) program as negative and have low confidence in the process and its benefits (28). Furthermore, the perceptions of SPPs can be positively impacted based on the SPPs actions of involving coaching staff, serving as a player-coach liaison, and earning trust through social and environmental involvement (40). Lastly, research indicates that the coaching staff’s perceptions of using an SPP vary. Although becoming more positive (43), the staff’s perceptions of and willingness to use an SPP is also a factor influencing athlete’s perceptions and use of mental skills (5, 15, 37, 2010).   

MENTAL SKILLS USE IN HOCKEY  

Research focused on hockey players’ perception and use of mental skills originated from Anderson et al. (4), who implemented a PST program in a collegiate hockey team throughout two seasons to help improve body checking in games. Body checking is seen as a beneficial asset in being successful against a team’s opponent and can often be used to defend, gain possession of the puck, and even intimidate. To date, body checking is only allowed in men’s hockey after a certain age and is penalized in women’s hockey. The use of body checking was assessed pre and post goal setting, feedback, and active praise interventions. It was found that hitting rates increased more with feedback over goal setting and praise. Furthermore, a study of junior-level Finnish hockey players found that using different methods of goal setting (e.g., task, approach) was highly correlated with enjoyment and perceived sporting ability (22). Most recently, after implementation of a PST program with a collegiate hockey team, players showed significant increases in their ability to cope with adversity, goal setting, peaking under pressure, and freedom from worry. Overall, this intervention positively influenced the mindfulness, resiliency, and coping skills in the personal and athletic lives of collegiate hockey players (42). These results highlight the continued importance of psychological skills training for hockey players. Research on mental skills of hockey goalies as their own unique group has also been done. A recent review of mental training effectiveness in hockey found that the majority of mental skills training (MST) programs have a cognitive control focus, specifically using attention, thought, and emotional control exercises (29). Common mental techniques used by goalies have been identified by both Monnich (29) and Gelinas and Munroe-Chandler (17), including mindfulness, imagery, goal setting, focused breathing, and self-talk.   

UNDERSTANDING HOCKEY CULTURE   

To better understand mental skills perception and use in hockey players, it is critical to analyse the hyper-masculine culture of hockey. Hockey has been culturally accepted as a tough, physical, and aggressive sport played by predominately white, middle to upper-class, heterosexual males (1, 3, 7, 18). Interviews with former and current Canadian Hockey League (CHL) players found that players attributed much of the masculine ideologies that describe how hockey should be played (3). Players also discussed how locker room culture is an environment that heavily enforces and upholds masculine ideals. Finally, participants expressed concern about how the media plays a role in suppressing traits that are not deemed as masculine (e.g., finesse style of play, not fighting, being vulnerable) (3). Using current NHL player Sidney Crosby as an example, Allain (2) showed how the media often called him ‘wimpy’ and a ‘complainer’, or during substantial concussion-based injuries as ‘weak’ (2). In addition, Lefebvre et al. (24) specifically addressed the stigmas surrounding mental health in junior hockey players. The researchers described how athletes often avoid seeking mental health counselling for fear of being seen as weak or unable to compete, a finding more prominent in male athletes (14, 24).  

Research on hockey culture also focuses on the challenges female players face (1, 18). Interviews with female hockey players in Sweden indicated their perceived femininity is deemed “at risk”, as opposed to the male athletes who are perceived as going through hockey as a rite of passage into manhood (18). Furthermore, women in hockey are deemed to have a ‘masculine’ image (muscular, tough) but are also required to prove their worth in ability and strength to compete in the men’s game. The participants also expressed how they are often viewed as inferior and that it is very difficult to challenge these norms and ideologies (18).  

Adams and Leavitt (2018) interviewed the staff of varying Alberta youth hockey associations. Participants heavily discussed the lack of female representation across positions within the organizations and poor refereeing due to the misunderstanding of body checking or lack thereof in the women’s game (1). Overall concluding that there is often a romanticization of female athletes, and how their journeys are portrayed as positive, but are often dampened by discrimination, accessibility issues, suppressed opportunity, and gender ideologies (1).  

PURPOSE  

Based on past research, it seems hockey players can benefit from working with an SPP, however few players are using this service, perhaps in part due to hockey culture. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to address the following research questions:   

1. Develop an understanding of the usage of mental skills in collegiate hockey players.  

2. Develop an understanding of the perceptions of mental skills held by hockey players.  

3. Better understand the impact if any of how hockey culture on the above beliefs. 

METHODS 

Participants 

Participants consisted of three collegiate athletes that competed in men’s hockey (participants four – six) and three collegiate athletes that competed in women’s hockey (participants one – three). Three of the six participants competed at the highest level of collegiate hockey, NCAA Division I, while two competed at ACHA DI, the highest level below NCAA, and one participant competed at the ACHA DII level.  

Procedures 

A semi-structured interview guide was developed for this study to increase the consistency of the interviews and give a framework for the interviewer to follow. Although there were set questions, the guide allowed for follow-up and engagement based on the clients’ answers, allowing for flexibility and opportunities for openness for the participants (35).   

The interview guide was comprised of three sections. The first section focused on the participants’ demographics and general sport experience. This section aimed to give the participants a chance to get comfortable with the interviewer and to develop a relationship between interviewer and interviewee. The second section of the interview guide was focused on understanding the athlete’s experiences with mental training, both formal and informal in the past, as well as on their perceptions of mental training. Example questions included “Would you be open to learning more about mental skills? Why or why not?” and “Have you used or do you use mental skills?”  The third and final section focused on the participants view of hockey culture and how if at all they felt it impacted their or others use of mental skills. Example questions included “If someone asked you to explain the culture of hockey, what would you say?” and “Do you think this culture influences your views on: the use of mental skills, seeking help from a sport psychologist, and what people think about you?” “Questions in each section of the interview guide were based on prior research stemming from the previously conducted literature review. The broader themes of topics found (i.e., body checking, how players might have been using mental skills) were used to guide the development of open-ended questions for the current study to satisfy a potential gap or recommendation suggested within the previous literature.” At any point during the interview process the participant wanted to expand or discuss ideas not included in the original questions, they were encouraged to do so freely, and this information was included as part of their experience and responses.   

IRB approval was obtained for this study. Once approval was obtained participants were recruited via convenience sampling. Specifically, as the primary researcher of this study was part of the collegiate hockey community, they reached out to coaches they knew to ask that they send a recruitment email to their athletes. Additionally, posts were made on social media via the primary and secondary researchers’ university and personal pages. Once participants emailed the research team indicating that they were interested in participating they were scheduled for a Zoom interview. Participants were interviewed until saturation was met.  “Saturation is defined as “when no new data or information is being produced, was believed to have occurred within the six participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Saunders et al., 2018).  

At the beginning of the interview, participants were sent a link to follow that included the research notification and an opportunity for them to consent to participation in the study. Zoom was chosen as it allowed for interviews with participants in a large geographical location and served to increase the convenience of participation for the participants.  Interviews were conducted by the first and second author of the study and lasted between 25-45 minutes.  Although every participant was asked the same questions from the interview guide, in the same way, the order with which they were asked and the extent of the follow up conversation was guided by the participant themselves, in an attempt to build open communication with the participants. Elaboration language such as “Can you tell me more about that?” or “Why do you think that is the case?” were used to give more detail and paint a fuller picture of the participants experiences (35). Interviews were recorded and transcribed using Yuja programming. Transcripts were then checked by the primary author for accuracy and any changes necessary were made. 

Data Analyses  

Coding and analysis were done using Braun and Clarke’s guide for reflexive thematic analysis (8, 9). Specifically, the aim was to follow an inductive, semantic, and realist approach to data analysis in the pursuit of finding meaning in the data. This method allowed the primary author, to identify, analyze, and assess patterns or themes within the transcripts. Using this method of data analysis also allowed for greater flexibility in theme extraction. At each stage she documented my work to help ensure the development of themes was clear and could be followed by the secondary author and a second coder who has brought in to increase trustworthiness at a later stage of the data analysis process. This was a six-phase approach in which she first became familiar with the data set by reading through the transcribed interviews multiple times, noting any initial thoughts or ideas. She then began to code initial thoughts, making sure to re- read the transcripts as thoughts and emerging themes were being identified, followed by a more in-depth analysis of the transcribed data by defining themes with the matching data.  Although she tried to not have her experiences impact coding, to allow for an inductive approach to the coding, it was noted that as a former hockey player and coach she likely had biases that she was bringing to the coding. Therefore, a researcher who was not part of the study design or implementation also independently coded the data using the same methodology. We then analyzed the codes against the data to make sure they were representative of the data. Once we had both developed our themes, we discussed any differences and came to a consensus. This led to a set of themes and where appropriate subthemes created to help explain the experiences of the participants. Finally, by writing down the analysis process the primary researcher was able to notice patterns and connect the themes to past research, as is desired in the final step of thematic analysis (9). 

To increase the trustworthiness of this study, credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability were assessed (25, 32). Specifically, as a previous hockey player and sport psychology professional, the primary researcher recognized the biases she possessed and the potential impact it would have on the study. Therefore, not only was a second coder brought in, as noted above, but peer debriefing, with the second author of the study serving in the role, was used to challenge her assumptions and analyze the data collection and data analysis of both her and the outside coder (establishing credibility). After the two coders had met to go over their codes and came to agreement, an external auditor also reviewed both the process and the results (establishing dependability and transferability). Finally, a thick description of both the research process and the participants’ interviews are included in this manuscript to increase transferability and confirmability.   

RESULTS 

Four themes emerged that impacted if and how the players used mental training skills, their perceptions of mental training, and their perceptions of sport psychology professionals. The major themes that emerged were level of competition, exposure, and hockey culture. Furthermore, players indicated using several mental training strategies which was a final theme related to hockey players mental training use. Each theme also had sub themes, for a full list see Table 1 with further description and illustrative quotations below. 

Table 1   

Theme Chart  

Theme	Subtheme
Level of Competition	Length of season  Intensity of the game
Exposure	Organizational support – access to SPC    Coaching staff  Peers and teammates   Classes   Lack of exposure
Hockey Culture	How others view hockey players and hockey culture  Participants’ views of hockey culture
Mental Strategies Used	Skills development  Strategy development

Level of Competition  

The level of competition theme included two subthemes. The first subtheme was length of season, with three participants noting the length of the season being a reason to use mental training. As stated by Participant 1 “Hockey is a long season too … so I think it could take a toll on your mental, but yeah.”  The second subtheme was the level of intensity present at the collegiate level where participants expressed using mental skills were more important at higher levels. For example, Participant 3 noted “College hockey is kind of a lot, it takes like a mental toll on you. I definitely am experiencing it right now. As fun as hockey is, like, it gets pretty tough.” Participant 5 who competes in the NCAA DI level, stated  

“I think it’s [mental training] super important, especially as you get older. As you climb the ranks of hockey through high school and junior hockey to college, it becomes more and more important…. Everyone’s really good hockey players when you get to this point. So, you’ve got to find an edge somewhere. So that’s when you realize you got to start doing a different mental preparation thing.”   

In contrast, Participant 4 who competes at the ACHA DI level, discussed how they recognized mental skills use but “I just wanted to train really hard, but I’ve never really wanted to train my mind … it’s just we’re there to have fun, right.” It is important to note that this was in part in comparison to many people he played with in Canada currently playing at what he perceived to be higher levels of play, “I’m just here to have fun … I got to play hockey through my whole career at school and stuff like that. That’s kinda where I’m happy. These guys [people he played with as a youth] are getting paid to play, so I’m paying to play.” (Participant 4).  The differences in the athletes’ views of the levels they competed at highlight the importance of athletes’ perception of their experiences.   

Exposure   

The theme of exposure relates to the experiences participants had about how their environment and how those within it influence their usage and perceptions of mental skills. Within this theme, five subthemes were identified: organizational support, coaching staff, peers and teammates, classes, and lack of exposure.    

For the subtheme of organization support four of the six participants expressed how they would use services provided by a SPP if this resource was available to them at the organizational level but that they did not have access with their current team (contracted by the athletic department). As expressed by Participant 5   

Yeah, I think if it [mental training] was available, I think if we had one at school right now, I think if that was available to the team, I definitely be talking to him or her. But unfortunately, it’s not something we have here. But if the opportunity presents itself, I definitely think I would see them. 

For the second subtheme of coaching staff, all six participants explained how their coaching staff influences their use and perceptions of mental skills. Three participants indicated that their coaches often offered support, emphasis on proper preparation, and suggested mental training books. Participant 6 explained their coach’s emphasis on preparation, “… [talks] about preparation stuff… like not going out the night before games, gotta get prepared. Like to make sure to stay in shape, don’t be eating like shit.” While other participants expressed how their coaching staff neglect or do not encourage mental skills use. As Participant 4 described “He mentioned them, but he just yells at us. He pretty much just tells us we’re not mentally strong … He knows like your mentality is very important, but he doesn’t know how to like build your confidence.” Further explained by Participant 2 “We’re always told growing up that hockey is 90% mental and 10% physical… they didn’t put emphasis on the mental part, but they still tried to get people to think about that too.”   

Peers and teammates were the third subtheme identified in the exposure theme. Four participants discussed the impact of peers and teammates. For instance, Participant 4 stated   

Through my coach or through my peers. I think like if my buddies were saying, yeah, like I’m using this guy and he’s awesome. Or if my coach said, here we brought this guy in there, and hear them talk and see if you like them, then I’d be more willing to try stuff like that.  

For the subtheme of classes, two participants explained how they were exposed to mental skills use through taking Sport Psychology classes as part of earning their degree. Participant 2 described where they learned to use visualization techniques “I had been doing it [visualization] already, but I learned it in school,” and Participant 4 stated “I feel like school helped me more to understand my mental skills.”   

Lastly, the lack of exposure subtheme. Of the six participants four of them discussed using mental training skills, however, none of the participants had experience with or exposure to a SPP. There was also a general misunderstanding of mental skills use. Three of the six participants asked for clarification on what mental skills are or an example of mental skills use after being asked if they use mental skills. “Like what does that entail?” (Participant 1). Misunderstanding mental training and mental health was a common trend when these participants were asked about working with a SPP. “I don’t think I need to, but if it was diagnosed that I did, then yeah, I’d be open to it,” (Participant 6).   

Hockey Culture  

A prominent discussion point was that of hockey culture and its influence on mental skills use and perceptions. Two subthemes emerged from these conversations, how others view hockey players and hockey culture, and participants’ views of hockey culture.    

The first subtheme of how others view hockey players and hockey culture was described in the following ways. For example, Participant 3 described “I would have always chosen hockey over every sport just because of the people that I’ve met and the experiences that I’ve had, like I wouldn’t change any of that.” Male participants spoke to how male hockey players are seen as ‘red flags’ or ‘a**holes’.  Participant 6 said  

Yeah, so common beliefs for hockey players, definitely like not great guys, scum bags. Like think they’re better than everyone else. I think those are typical stereotypes for sure. Don’t think those are all true … the perception of hockey players all the time isn’t great.  

When discussing perceptions of hockey players and common stereotypes, the female participants explained how people perceive them in a masculine nature. “People do see that I’m hockey player, they kinda like take a step back because normally people are like field hockey or like they don’t think of like ice hockey because that’s normally just a guy sport,” (Participant 1). Within the conversation of differences between men’s and women’s hockey were comments related to body checking. The female participants expressed how the disallowance of body checking in women’s hockey supports the common stereotypes and perceptions about women’s hockey. “They come to our games, and we don’t do that (body check) and then they think it’s boring, or they think that we’re not good or something like that … because we’re women and more fragile and we can’t get hit because we will cry,” (Participant 2). In terms of influencing mental skills use and perceptions, Participant 2 also explained how the masculine stigmas of toughness associated with mental health would prevent male players or teams to work with a sport psychology professional,   

Because men are taught from a very young age that emotion, that they’re not supposed to show emotion and they’re not supposed to be vulnerable. So that would be putting them in a state of vulnerability. And then playing hockey in the first place is their spot to get out all that stuff on the ice and in an aggressive way.  

The second subtheme was participants’ views of hockey culture and their experiences within it. Three participants discussed how being mentally tough and being perceived as tough is important in hockey and impacted their use or lack of use of mental training strategies and/or seeing a sport psychology professional. Participant 1 noted “…I think just like the overall mental toughness and needing to have thick skin and like on and off the ice. And that if you can work on that, then it’s going to make you a better player.” Despite this, two participants alluded to their perceived importance of mental toughness in different way, like disregarding the need for SPP use or mental skills because they felt like support from their teammates was enough to help them, or vice versa, in that their teammates would support them in bettering themselves. As Participant 1 described “Yeah, I think if you’re not in a good culture, then definitely I would have to seek help, but being in a good culture, I don’t think you’d need to get help if you’re in a good environment.”   

Mental Skills Strategies Used   

Two subthemes, skill development and strategy use were identified within this theme. Mental skills used included staying focused and managing emotions. Participant 2 described   

“I don’t know, try, and keep all of my emotions down. Like I don’t get, I get very invested into the game and I get very emotional like as the game progresses and calming that down so I can focus on just playing instead of dealing with all this emotion plus having to play as well.” Participant 1 also noted “I think it’s a good way to talk to yourself and you don’t have to bring it out on other people. It’s more just between you and yourself.”  

The subtheme of mental strategies included breathing exercises, visualization, and preparation-based routines. Participant 6 highlighted the importance of their pregame routine and using visualization to help them prepare for their game, despite misunderstanding mental skills use previously,  

I usually put my AirPods in and just go I get ready like pretty, fairly early. I get dressed little early put my AirPods in and then go sit on the bench and just like look at the clean ice like after the Zamboni is done and just kind of visualize like what I’m gonna do out there.  

Participant 2 said “Yeah I like to visualize… I think it gives me a little bit more confidence, especially if it’s a big game and I’m nervous and it gives me the confidence that I could do the little things right.” Participant 5 stated   

I think visualization is a big mental skill that I use. Being a goalie, I think it’s a big part of the game… I like to spend the night if I know I’m playing the night before, I’d like to, before I go to bed, close my eyes and imagine game scenarios against who were playing and their players and fix myself in different situations so it can be best prepared for whatever is thrown at me during the game.  

DISCUSSION 

The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceptions and usage of mental skills in collegiate hockey players, along with perceptions of how hockey culture impacts these beliefs through interviews with current college hockey players. Interviews with six collegiate hockey players led to the following four themes emerging: Level of Competition, Exposure, Hockey Culture, and Mental Strategies Used. Within Level of Competition, two subthemes were identified: length of season and intensity of the game. Five subthemes were identified within Exposure: organizational support and access, coaching staff, peers and teammates, classes, and lack of exposure. Within Hockey Culture, two subthemes were found: others’ view of hockey culture and participants’ views of hockey culture. Lastly, two themes emerged from Mental Strategies Used: skills development and strategy development.   

When assessing the participants’ views on level of play and intensity, participants at the highest collegiate level found mental skills use to be more important than participants at lower levels, with one participant even noting that he did not use mental training strategies since he did not see the reason to for his lower level of play. Players noting level of play and intensity of the game as reasons to use or not use mental training highlights the need for more education on how mental training can be beneficial at all levels of the game.   

 The fact that none of the participants had worked with a SPP or had a coach who advocated or taught mental training strategies adds to this view.  Despite this, four participants still used a variety of mental strategies, most commonly imagery and breathing exercises. Given that these participants have had no experience in working with a SPP, nor encouragement from those around them to do so, it is of interest to determine where hockey players may be learning these strategies and if they are using them in an effective way. Future research should consider addressing this question via quantitative research that can better understand how mental strategies are being learned and implemented by athletes.  

Participants all noted not having access to an SPP, but that they would be willing to work with an SPP if they had access. Research conducted by Wrisberg et al. (41) at the NCAA DI level suggests that this may be due to lack of funds and differing perceptions athletic departments hold that prevent them from adding an SPP to their staff as an available resource to their student-athletes. Earlier research conducted by Wilson et al. (38) on athletic directors’ perceptions of SPPs show that higher value was placed on support staff that focused on physical wellbeing of student athletes (athletic trainers, strength and conditioning coaches) rather than consultation services provided by an SPP. This highlights the importance of the organization when it comes to athletes’ mental skills use. These findings support past research that indicated leadership was an important aspect of influencing the beliefs and values of those within a sporting organization’s culture. (14, 36). This also lends support to the current recommendations by the NCAA that athletics departments focus on athlete mental well-being in their hiring practices, including hiring those who specialize in sport psychology (30, 31).  

Coaches and peers were also shown to be important stakeholders when it came to athletes’ use and perception of mental training. The role of the coach as an influence on athletes is well established in the literature with Chu and Tang (11) noting coaches are the most important social agent of influence on an athlete’s autonomy. Furthermore, this finding supports past research that has indicated that a coaching staff’s perception of an SPP or mental skills use is crucial in how their athletes perceive them as well (5, 15, 37, 40, 43). In this study, participants noted that their coaches heavily encouraged mental toughness but none of the participants were taught about mental training or what exactly their coach meant, or ways to achieve mental toughness. This lack of support for mental training while expecting athletes to be “mentally tough” indicates athletes are being asked to achieve a psychological level of performance without the necessary support. As we would never expect athletes to “just get fit” without giving them resources to do so, this highlights the need for applied sport psychology to be more accessible to athletes. With this in mind, it is important for both future researchers and applied professionals to focus on how to get the important stakeholders within sport to advocate and promote sport psychology use. Furthermore, these results highlight the lack of access players had and the role this plays in athletes lacking an understanding of what mental training entails and how they could use psychological skills training for their sport performance.    

Hockey culture was a prevalent theme within these interviews. All six participants addressed how much they enjoyed hockey culture, how unique it was to be a part of a hockey team, and that their team was a family. The tight knit community of a hockey team indicates a need for the SPP to be embedded with the team to have the greatest impact. Workshops conducted by Eubank et al. (13) at the 2013 CESP Conference discussed the importance of an SPP fully understanding and being engaged within the team’s culture as a monumental aspect of success. Participants all commented on hockey being seen as a ‘guys sport’, using words like “masculine” and “macho” to describe how they believe the sport is perceived by others.  They noted the stigmas of toughness and hypermasculine culture as being a deterrent to using mental training or seeing an SPP; this supports past research (1-3, 7, 14, 18) that found hypermasculinity as a large component of hockey culture is still prevalent today. Interestingly, female participants discussed the same stigmas, but they were less likely to be a deterrent to using sport psychology services for them, instead noting that these stereotypes and perceptions of others, and those within hockey were more likely to lead to perceptions of female players being seen as masculine, or less feminine. Not the area of focus for this study, but future research should investigate how these perceptions lead to female players continuing in the game and their perceptions of themselves as both hockey players and women.   

Interestingly two of the participants noted they were Canadian, and in both cases, they discussed the culture of hockey being different in America. As we did not explicitly ask questions related to country differences impacting hockey culture for all participants, we did not include it in our results, however it may be an area for future researchers to consider.   

As is the case with all research it is important to note potential limitations in these findings.  First, there was a lack of representation across all divisions among the sample. Furthermore, participants were all competing in Midwest or Eastern regions of the United States indicating that this sample was limited in its breadth across different levels and areas across the United States. 

APPLICATIONS IN SPORT AND FUTURE RESEARCH 

The themes that emerged indicate players lack of knowledge about mental training in hockey could be impacting both the use and perception of mental training.  The interviews made it apparent that the players feel a deep sense of attachment to their view of hockey as a unique culture, and it being a family. Therefore, SPPs interested in working with hockey teams should make sure to be aware of the need to be an immersed part of this family when it comes to getting buy-in with athletes. Additionally, SPP’s will also need to be aware of the lack of education or inaccurate education hockey players may have about PST and how they can be an asset to the players’ experiences. 

 An SPP should become familiar with the unique culture of hockey, including differences in the men’s and women’s game, as well as lack of exposure to mental training that their players have had when beginning a PST program with a team or individual.  Notably, the culture of hockey upholds specific behaviours that may challenge an SPP. Specific language and routines may take time to understand in terms of application of SPP workshops and skills, SPPs should be cognizant of this adjustment period and the significance of these cultural pillars present within hockey and its participants. Additionally, there are meaningful differences between that of men’s hockey and women’s hockey. SPPs need to understand the processes associated with each and with highlighted importance of the expectations and stereotypes that may be present and affect both men’s and women’s hockey players. In addition, the course of career play differs significantly between the two. Men’s hockey has varying paths and opportunities available, with the recent updates between the NCAA and CHL that supports the playing of male players in both of these leagues. However, the opportunities for female hockey players is slowly changing. SPPs should become familiar with the emergence of the Professional Women’s Hockey League (PWHL) and the significance this holds for many aspiring female players and the development of women’s hockey. Lastly, as many participants stated within the current study, not all hockey players may have had exposure to or experience working with a SPP. In that, SPPs need to approach the instruction of mental skills work and provisions of resources that support a breadth of existing knowledge present within the population they are working with. Specifically, in that the understanding of a niche and protected culture of hockey, coupled with a potential lack of experience, may mean that the SPP needs to continuously assess for knowledge and experience while planning specific programming for hockey teams and players.  

Future research should consider interviewing hockey players from other areas and levels. Specifically, since the sample of participants in this study was those in the Midwest and Eastern Regions of the United States, expanding to different geographic regions or countries would potentially lead to additional information. Finally, given the findings of this study, interview questions for future research might explore topics such as the specific mental skills participants use or find valuable, ask for further clarification or examples of hockey culture norms and perspectives.  

CONCLUSIONS 

The purpose of this study was to qualitatively investigate how collegiate hockey players use and perceive mental skills and determine the influence of hockey culture on these perceptions. The findings suggest that level of play, exposure, and hockey culture all play a heavy role in how collegiate hockey players use and perceive mental training. Participants described psychological strategies such as imagery, breathing exercises, and preparation routines. These findings are crucial for sport psychology professionals in understanding how to work effectively within the niche sporting culture of hockey. The uniqueness of hockey culture makes it important to study this group specifically, without making assumptions about their experiences with psychological skills training based on research in other sports.    

REFERENCES