Robert C. Schneider

Job satisfaction for campus recreation professionals within NIRSA institutions

An international investigation was conducted to determine the overall job satisfaction of college campus recreation employees who are members of the National Intramural Recreational Sports Association (NIRSA). Demographic information was gathered to provide statistical analysis based on (a) region; (b) size of school; (c) private versus public; (d) four-year versus two-year schools; (e) rural, suburban, and urban location; (f) years in the profession; and (g) reporting structure. The following work related areas were examined to determine if NIRSA members were satisfied with their job environment: (a) personal/individual satisfaction, (b) staffing and organizational structure, (c) financial support, (d) salary and professional development, (e) department and individual expectations, (f) campus recreation facilities, and (g) campus collaboration and communication. The study found that overall the respondents indicated they were satisfied with their job situation/environment with greater satisfaction being shown by those with loftier job titles when compared with those with lesser job titles. Differences in job satisfaction were noted in terms of (a) supervisors expectations of them, salary, and hours worked (based on amount of experience); (b) salary (based on title held); (c) budget allocation (based on reporting structure); and (d) a desire to leave their present position/job (in terms of job title held, experience/length of service and reporting structure).

Reporting Structure and Job Satisfaction of Collegiate Campus Recreation Directors

The differences in reporting structures among educational institutions, along with how satisfied campus recreation directors were with specific components of their jobs were studied. Directors, on a survey instrument, indicated to whom they reported and their level of satisfaction or dissatisfaction pertaining to 16 employment related areas within campus recreation. Overall, directors predominately reported to student affairs (62%), while 24% reported to athletics. Directors indicated highest levels of satisfaction in their organization and with other departments (89%) and expressed high levels of dissatisfaction with outdoor facilities and publicity related matters (56%). In order to attract and retain quality campus recreation directors, upper administration should make efforts to satisfy facility-related needs and publicity related matters of programs.

Club Sport Legal Liability Practices at NIRSA Institutions

Current legal practices in collegiate club sport programs were studied. A 23-item questionnaire consisting primarily of close-ended questions was mailed to 563 campus recreation directors representing all six National Intramural-Recreational Sports Association (NIRSA) regions. Data obtained showed that mean club sport budgets ranged from

A Survey of Campus Recreation Directors at NIRSA Institutions: Activities Emphasized, Student Participation Patterns, Trends and Future Offerings Contemplated

51,657 in Region 4 to

Applying the sport education model to basketball.

135,657 in Region 6, with an overall mean of

The Financial and Facility Status of Campus Recreation Programs at NIRSA Colleges and Universities

69,138 across all regions. Signing a waiver before participating was required by 91% of the directors. Lack of consistency in waiver language and font size was reported. Only 9% of campus recreation directors always require that an institutional employee travel with a club sport team. The most frequent modes of approved travel for club sport participants were students driving personal cars (94%), renting vans from outside vendors (95%), and the use of private transportation such as a chartered bus (70%). Paid coaches were used by 15% of the directors.

What High School Principals Expect of Their Athletics Directors--A National Investigation.

A survey, using an instrument constructed expressly for this investigation, was conducted of directors of campus recreation at all 682 NIRSA colleges and universities in the United States and Canada to determine the current status of: (a) the degree of emphasis institutions currently place on nine categories of sports and recreational activities, (b) the percentage of students, undergraduate and graduate, actually participating in each of these nine categories of activities, (c) future recreational activities and programs, not currently offered to students, but being considered for inclusion within the next 12 months, and (d) future trends in terms of problems (challenges and opportunities) facing college campus recreation departments. Two hundred and sixty-nine schools returned usable surveys for a 39% rate of return. This investigation provides a snapshot of specific current practices and programming offerings of campus Recreation Directors, as well as their opinions in terms of future programming plans and anticipated trends affecting their campus recreation departments. The data were analyzed in light of the locations of the responding institutions within the six regions of NIRSA, the size of the institutions and whether the schools were classified as public or private. The nine categories of recreational activities included: (a) intramurals, (b) club sports, (c) open recreation, (d) outdoor recreation, (e) group exercise/aerobics, (f) aquatics, (g) instructional programming, (h) special events, and (i) youth and family activities.

Entrepreneurialism and Sport Leadership: Some Lessons for the Balkans

W ith only seconds remaining in the postseason championship basketball game, the Blue Dragons trail by one point and have the ball. Recognizing the urgency at hand, their captain and point guard calls a play for Tammy, the team’s best scorer. The players’ competitive instincts peak as they spontaneously execute, to near perfection, the play they have repeated over and over in self-organized practices. However, as Tammy elevates toward the rim a defender closes on her to contest the shot. The piercing sound of an official’s whistle is music to Tammy’s ears as a foul is called and she will be awarded two freethrows. Emotions run high on both teams as the official calmly reports the foul to the head scorer who is seated at the scorer’s table between two statisticians. Tammy steps to the free throw-line and makes both shots as the Blue Dragons enthusiastically celebrate their championship victory. The championship game described above was played during the final week of a physical education basketball unit in which the sport education model (SEM) was applied throughout the unit. The SEM was designed in the 1980s and is credited to Daryl Siedentop, who based its creation on extensive research (Siedentop, Hastie, & van der Mars, 2004). The central features of the SEM that define institutional sport are (1) affiliation, (2) seasons, (3) record keeping, (4) formal competition, (5) culminating events, and (6) festivity (Siedentop et al.). All six features are present in the preceding paragraph’s illustration of the championship basketball game and will be highlighted in the application section of this article. The unique qualities of the SEM are also pointed out. Taking on an interdisciplinary approach to teaching, the SEM provides students with a holistic understanding of basketball as all students engage in previously established roles throughout the unit. Although course objectives are established by the instructors, it is the students who play a central role in planning, organizing, and implementing the SEM. The SEM also involves a clear commitment to teaching students about personal and shared responsibility (Penney, Kinchin, Clark, & Quill, 2005). The purpose of this article is to provide tips for the effective application of the SEM to a basketball unit. The tips are based on the actual application of the SEM to an advanced basketball class at the College at Brockport. Two items of importance should be noted here: (1) the SEM can be applied to various age and grade levels—Siedentop et al. (2004) stated that the SEM is recognized throughout the world as a viable model for physical education in third through 12th grade—as long as most students have mastered basic skill levels, and (2) the tips are not necessarily exclusive to basketball, but can be transferred across content areas at the discretion of individual instructors. Applying the SEM to Basketball As a general guide, tips for applying the SEM to a basketball unit should be completed in order. However, given the many unique teaching environments instructors find themselves in, sequential as well as content modifications can be made to best meet each instructor’s course objectives. The tips offered in this article are just that, tips. For a comprehensive guide to the SEM, consider the textbooks written by Siedentop et al. (2004) and Siedentop (1994). 1. The instructor describes the SEM to the class and explains how it will be applied throughout three seasons (seasons). The preseason takes place before the regular season and includes assessing player talents, establishing team captains, conducting a blind draft, establishing duty roles for all students, direct instruction of basketball skills and strategies, and coverage of rules. During the regular season, competitive games are scheduled and played. The postseason includes the team competition tournament, championship game, and awards ceremony. Initially, the instructor speaks to the students as a group and

What Every Public School Physical Educator Should Know about the Hiring Process.

Directors of campus recreation at NIRSA colleges and universities in the US and Canada were surveyed to determine: (a) the number of schools that have built, within the preceding three years, major indoor as well as major outdoor campus recreation facilities and the number of institutions planning to do so within the next three years; (b) the usage and scheduling priorities covering all campus recreation facilities; (c) the sources of funding for the construction of these major facilities and sites; and (d) the sources of funding for operational activities for campus recreation. The data were analyzed in terms of school size, location, and whether public or private in nature. The findings revealed that 56% of the institutions surveyed had either recently built new major indoor student recreation centers or were planning to do so, within the next three years. In terms of major outdoor facilities or sites, the percentage was 41%. The majority of construction funds for indoor and outdoor facilities/sites as well as operational funds for programs and activities came from future student fees at most of the public schools. Typically, private schools had the majority of their monies for both indoor and outdoor facilities emanating from private sources while the majority of operating costs was covered through the general fund of the institutions. The sharing of facilities continues with both physical education and with athletics; and, the directors of campus recreation, generally speaking, felt comfortable with such arrangements, even when such arrangements include having athletic and physical education activities take precedence in usage over those of campus recreation.

Title IX Compliance in NCAA Athletic Departments: Perceptions of Senior Woman Administrators

thletics directors play a major role in the ultimate success or A failure of public and private secondary-school athletics programs. Overseeing scholastic athletic competition has evolved into a challenging task that requires more skills, training, and experience than ever before. Thus it should come as no surprise that the previous accomplishments and experiences of individuals placed in charge of high school sports programs are being closely scrutinized.