37?/67531/metadc331805/...37? a/g/j mo. suti entry level competencies for recreational sports...
TRANSCRIPT
37? A/g/J Mo. SUti
ENTRY LEVEL COMPETENCIES FOR RECREATIONAL SPORTS
PERSONNEL AS IDENTIFIED BY CHAIRS OF
PREPARATORY INSTITUTIONS
DISSERTATION
Presented to the Graduate Council of the
North Texas State University in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements
For the Degree of
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
By
Marion Wayne Jennings, M.Ed,
Denton, Texas
May, 1984
© 1984
MARION WAYNE JENNINGS
All Rights Reserved
Jennings, Marion Wayne, Entry Level Competencies for
Recreational Sports Personnel as Identified by Chairs of
preparatory Institutions. Doctor of Education (Higher
Education), May, 1984, 115 pp., 14 tables, bibliography,
61 titles.
The problem of this study was to determine if the
competencies identified by recreational sports practitioners
as most needed for entry into the profession were the same
as those identified by chairpersons of preparatory depart-
ments. Furthermore, this study determined if chairpersons
of physical education and recreation curricula identified
significantly different competency areas for entry level
personnel.
The two populations of respondents were from sixty-
seven institutions listed in the 1982 SPRE-NRPA Curriculum
Catalog. Each subject was asked to complete a copy of the
Jamieson Recreational Sports Competency Analysis. The
criterion scores for each of the statements were divided
into twelve competency areas for analysis.
A usable response rate of 68.5 per cent was obtained
from physical education chairpersons and a useable response
rate of 71.64 per cent was obtained from recreation chair-
persons. Chairpersons of physical education ranked the
competency areas in the following order: philosophical
foundations, safety/accident prevention, communications,
governance, officiating, programming techniques, sports
science, management techniques, legality, facilities/
maintenance, business procedures and research. Chairpersons
of recreation departments ranked the competency areas in the
following order: philosophical foundations, safety/accident
prevention, communications, governance, management tech-
niques, programming techniques, legality, facilities/
maintenance, business procedures, sport science, officiating
and research.
A comparison of the scores given the competency areas
of physical education and recreation chairpersons produced
a significant F-ratio for the competency area of officiating.
A comparison of the criterion scores produced in the compe-
tency areas by recreation chairpersons and recreational
sports practitioners produced significant F-ratios for the
competency areas of business procedures, communications,
facilities/maintenance, governance, legality, management
techniques, research, philosophy and programming techniques.
A comparison of the criterion scores produced for the compe-
tency areas by physical education chairpersons and recrea-
tional sports practitioners produced significant F-ratios
for the competency areas of business procedures, communica-
tions, facilities/maintenance, governance, legality,
management techniques, officiating, philosophical founda-
tions, programming techniques, and research.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES V
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Statement of the Problem Purpose of the Study Hypotheses Background and Significance Definition of Terms Limitations of the Study Assumptions of the Study Procedure for Collection of the Data Treatment of the Data Chapter Bibliography
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 14
Competency-Based Education Research Pertaining to Competency-
Based Education Professional Development in Physical
Education Professional Development in Recreation Professional Development in Recreational
Sports Summary of Literature Review Chapter Bibliography
III. PROCEDURES 45
Selection of the Instrument Research Design Chapter Bibliography
IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA . 50
Chapter Bibliography
i n
Chapter Page
V. SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 80
Summary Findings Conclusions Recommendations
APPENDIX 89
BIBLIOGRAPHY 110
xv
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
I. Percentage of Responses of Physical Educa-tion and Recreation Chairpersons to the Survey . 56
II. Level of F-Ratio Significance Between Populations 6 3
III. Analysis of Variance Between Populations Area 1—Business Procedues . 65
IV. Analysis of Variance Between Populations Area 2—Communications 66
V. Analysis of Variance Between Populations Area 3—Facilities/Maintenance 67
VI. Analysis of Variance Between Populations Area 4—Governance 68
VII. Analysis of Variance Between Populations Area 5—Legality 70
VIII. Analysis of Variance Between Populations Area 6--Management 71
IX. Analysis of Variance Between Populations Area 7—Officiating 72
X. Analysis of Variance Between Populations Area 8—Philosophical Foundations . . . . 73
XI. Analysis of Variance Between Populations Area 9—Programming Techniques 74
XII. Analysis of Variance Between Populations Area 10—Research . . . . . . . 76
XIII. Analysis of Variance Between Populations Area ll--Safety/Accident Prevention . . . 77
XIV. Analysis of Variance Between Populations Area 12 — Sport Science 78
v
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The field of recreational sports is an interdisciplin-
ary blend of physical education and recreation. Hotchkiss
(6) in a paper on recreational sport terminology defined
recreational sports as varying degrees of competitive play in
game form; a group of comprehensive recreation opportunities
that occur through extramural and intramural competition,
clubs, self-directed leisure and instructional programs.
It exists in specialized forms in varied settings such as:
military installations, correctional institutions,
commercial-private enterprises, industrial firms, municipal
and educational institutions.
A professional organization has existed for recrea-
tional sports since 1950, but Jamieson's study in 198 0 has
been the only attempt made to identify the competencies
needed by recreational sports personnel (8)« Jamieson sent
a questionnaire containing a competency checklist to 300
randomly selected recreational sports professional personnel
at 100 military settings, 100 educational settings, and 100
municipal settings. The competency areas identified by the
136 respondents as most needed for entry level recreational
sports personnel were: safety/accident prevention,
programming techniques, governance, science, and philosoph-
ical foundations (8).
Persons wishing to enter the field of recreational
sports most often seek to acquire these competencies by
preparation in colleges and universities. The curriculum
that they follow is primarily within a department of
physical education or a department of recreation. Some
institutions may have a combined department of health,
physical education, and recreation. The effectiveness of
a student's professional preparation is determined in part
by the curriculum emphasis of each department.
Statement of the Problem
The problem in this study is to determine if the
competencies identified by recreational sports practi-
tioners as most needed for entry into the profession of
recreational sports are the same as those identified by
chairpersons of preparatory departments of physical
education and recreation.
The problem is divided into the following subproblems:
1. What are the competencies identified by chair-
persons of physical education departments as most needed
for entry level recreational sports personnel?
2. What are the competencies identified by chair-
persons of recreation departments as most needed for entry
level recreational sports personnel?
3. How do the responses of the chairpersons of physi-
cal education departments and chairpersons of recreation
departments differ?
4. How do the responses of the chairpersons of physi-
cal education departments as determined in this study and
recreational sports practitioners as developed from
Jamieson's (6) data differ?
5. How do the responses of the chairpersons of recrea-
tion departments as determined in this study and recreational
sports practitioners as developed from Jamieson's (8) data
differ?
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to determine if the
competency areas identified by practitioners as most needed
for entry level recreational sports personnel will be
different from those identified by chairpersons of the
college and university physical education and recreation
departments that prepare these entry level personnel.
Furthermore, this study will determine if chairpersons of
physical education curricula and chairpersons of recreation
curricula identify significantly different competency areas
for entry level recreation sports personnel.
Hypotheses
1. The competencies identified as most needed for
entry level recreational sports personnel by chairpersons
of physical education departments will differ significantly
from the competencies identified by chairpersons of recrea-
tion departments.
2. The competencies identified as most needed for
entry level recreational sports personnel by chairpersons
of physical education departments will differ significantly
from the competencies identified by recreational sport
practitioners.
3. The competencies identified as most needed for
entry level recreational sports personnel by chairpersons
of recreation departments will differ significantly from
the competencies identified by recreational sport practi-
tioners.
Background and Significance
The field of recreational sports has grown in an
attempt to meet the ever increasing demands of society.
This growth has resulted in a need to identify the exact
skills needed to provide qualified personnel for the
field of recreational sports.
Preo(ll) first noted the need for research to examine
the professional preparation of recreational sports
administrators as an area different from physical education
and recreation administrators. He suggested that training
recreational sports personnel be conducted in such a
manner as to provide both a technical and conceptual
framework for the administrator.
Beardsley and Mull (1) addressed the needs of under-
graduate and graduate recreational sports preparation in
the American Alliance of Health, Physical Education, and
Recreation publication Professional Preparation of the
Intramural-Recreational Sports Specialist. The publication
provided for the following areas of study:
1. Undergraduate—Programming Option
a. Intramural-recreational sports programming
b. Sports officiating
c. Safety and first aid
d. Intramural-recreational sports leadership
e. Practical experience
2. Graduate-Administration Emphasis
a. Intramural-recreational sports administration
b. Research
c. Philosophy of leisure
d. Public relations
e. Internship
f. Sport facility management and construction
g. Psychology of sport
h. Sociology of sport
i. Human relations
j. Seminars
k. Field trips
As competency based education received more attention
in teacher education, therapeutic recreation, and other
fields, it was necessary to examine the field of recrea-
tional sports to develop an academic base to prepare
persons for entry into the field. The Jamieson Recrea-
tional Sports Competency Analysis was developed to
determine the competencies needed by professionals at
the entry level, middle management, and director level
of recreational sports (8).
Jamieson then surveyed practitioners of recreational
sports in military, municipal, and educational settings
to determine needed competencies for each of the three
professional levels. The competency areas most needed for
entry level recreational sports personnel were safety/
accident prevention, programming techniques, governance,
sport science, and philosophical foundations.
The competencies that are perceived by chairpersons
of departments of physical education and recreation as
necessary for entry level recreational sports personnel
will influence the general nature of recreational sports
course in higher education (11). This study sought to
identify those competency perceptions.
The study focused on the differences in competencies
needed for entry level recreational sports personnel as
perceived by practitioners in the field of recreational
sports and the chairpersons of physical education and
recreation departments. Preo stated that the effectiveness
of professional preparation of recreational sports per-
sonnel is influenced by the way in which recreational
sports personnel are perceived by others (11).
Definition of Terms
The basic terminology used in this study is defined
as follows.
1. Competency—A composite skill behavior or
knowledge that can be demonstrated by the learner and
derived from explicit conceptualizations of the desired
outcome of learning (5).
2. Competency area—A major grouping of subjects,
skills or sub-competencies (8).
3. Recreational s£orts--Varying degrees and/or
interest levels of competitive activity in game form for
everyone (7).
a. Informal sports--SeIf-directed competitive
activities in game form requiring minimal or no
organization (7).
b. Intramural sports—Structured, competitive
activities in game form requiring organization and
direction (7).
c. Extramural sports—Competitive activities
where teams from one institution's intramural sports
8
program compete against another institution's intra-
mural sports teams (7).
d. Club sports—Groups that organize because of
a common interest in competitive activity and social-
izing ( 7).
4. Curriculum area—A major grouping of subject areas
or sub-competencies (10).
5. Professional preparation—Formal learning exper-
iences structured to prepare personnel for a field of
endeavor (11).
6• Entry level recreational sports personnel—
Activity specialist, face-to-face leader (8).
Limitations of the Study
The study is limited by the following factors:
1. The degree to which the respondents understand
the research instrument;
2. The limitations recognized in collecting data
by mailed questionnaire;
3. The possible changes in perceived needs among
practitioners since the Jamieson study.
Assumptions of the Study
The study was based on the following assumptions.
1. It is assumed that the respondents have an
adequate understanding of recreational sports terminology.
2. It is assumed that the chairperson's responses
reflect the professional preparation curriculum at their
institution.
Procedure for Collection of the Data
The Jamieson Recreational Sports Competency Analysis
was used to collect the data for this study. The mail
questionnaire techniques used by Jamieson (7) were repli-
cated for this study. Each subject was sent a question-
naire with a cover letter and self-addressed, stamped
envelope. A follow-up post card was sent fourteen days
after the first mailing and a follow-up letter with an
additional questionnaire was sent twenty-eight days after
the original mailing.
Jones (9) stated that correct address and personaliza-
tion of address have an impact on how well the questionnaire
is received by the recipient. Length of the questionnaire
may influence rate of return as may failure to include a
stamped self-addressed means of return. If cost is not a
factor, inclusion of a second questionnaire for the respon-
dent to keep may improve return.
A cover letter should be included with each question-
naire that explains the purpose of the study and emphasizes
its importance to the profession. A deadline data and a
willingness to share the results should also be in the
cover letter as should a guarantee of confidentiality (4).
10
Follow-up strategies to include a reminder post card
and then another letter and questionnaire may be needed to
receive the percentage of returns desired. The higher the
rate of return, the more valid the conclusions of the
study (2). A response rate of 60 per cent was sought from
each of the two populations in this study.
The two populations were chairpersons of physical
education and recreation departments at four-year colleges
and universities with an enrollment of more than 10,000
students. This minimum number was an attempt to have
separate departments of recreation and physical education.
Smaller schools would be more likely to have a combined
program. The mailing list for the populations was developed
from the 1982 Society of Park and Recreation Educators
(SPRE)--National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA)
Curriculum Catalog. Borg and Gall (3) state that if a
specific professional group is determined to have informa-
tion needed in a study, that the members of that organiza-
tion may be used as the study population. While other
institutions meeting the criteria may exist, no concise
listing with addresses was available.
Treatment of the Data
This study is designed to identify competency areas
needed for entry level recreational sports personnel as
perceived by chairpersons of physical education and
11
recreation departments at four-year institutions of higher
learning. A three-point scale was used to determine if
competency statements are of no importance, below average
importance, average importance, or above average importance.
The resulting criterion scores for each statement were
compared with existing scores developed from data supplied
by Jamieson from the 1980 study of recreational sports
practitioners. One way analysis of variance was used to
determine differences between the groups. The scale, while
ordinal, can be considered interval in nature due to the
indefinite numerical distance between 0, 1, 2, and 3, on
the scale (3). A significance level of .05 was established.
The independent variables consist of the three profes-
sional groups responding to the questionnaire: practition-
ers of recreational sports, physical education department
chairpersons, and recreation department chairpersons. The
dependent variables consist of the twelve competency
statements.
The design is a fixed model because the respondent
groups were selected from a specific population rather
than randomly selected. Therefore, the results of the
analysis may only be generalized to the respondent groups
surveyed.
CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Beardsley, K. P., and R. F. Mull, Professional Prepara-tion of the Intramural-Recreational Sports Specialist/ Washington, D. C., AAHPER Publications, 1977.
2. Best, J. W., Research in Education, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970.
3. Borg, W. R., and M. D. Gall, Educational Research, An Introduction, New York, New York, David McKay Company, Inc., 1976.
4. Borg, W. R., Applying Educational Research, New York, Longman Inc., 1981.
5. Hall, G. E., and H. L. Jones, Competency-Based Educa-tion: A Process for the Improvement of Education, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice-Hall, 1976.
6. Hotchkiss, M., "Agreement Assessment of Recreational Sport Terminology," unpublished master's thesis, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1982.
7. Jamieson, L. M., "A Competency Analysis of Recreational Sports Personnel in Selected Institutional Settings," NIRSA Journal, 7 (1982), 20-24.
8. Jamieson, L. M., "A Competency Analysis of Recreational Sports Personnel in Selected Institutional Settings," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1980.
9. Jones, R. H., Methods and Techniques of Educational Research, Danville, Illinois, Interstate Printers and Publisher, Inc., 1973.
10 Nixon, J. E., and A. E. Jewett, Physical Education Curriculum, New York, Ronald Press Co., 1964.
11. Preo, L. S., "A Comparative Analysis of Current Status and Professional preparation of Intramural Direc-tors," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer-sity of Illinois, Chicago, Illinois, 1973.
12
13
12. Preo, L. S., "Professional Preparation of Administrators of Intramural and Physical Recreation Program," in Intramural Administration, Theory and Practice, edited by J. A. Peterson, West Point, New York, Leisure Press, 1977.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The recreational sports profession has developed as
an interdisciplinary area with its roots in both physical
education and recreation. This interdisciplinary nature
of recreational sports has complicated competency
identification in the profession. Jamieson's 1980 study
was the first to validate a specific knowledge base in
recreational sports. The review of literature will
include the use of the Educational Resource Information
Center data base and listings which deal with the areas of
competency-based education in specific and related areas
of recreational sports.
Competency-Based Education
Although Competency-Based Education (CEB) has recently
developed in teacher education, the concept has its origin
in ancient times (1). A teacher surplus, public demand
for accountability, and an increase in research pertaining
to instructional methods were the catalysts that have
triggered recent interest in Competency-Based Education
programs (25).
14
15
Competency-based education is a systematic approach
to learning that is directed toward specific outcomes
that describe exactly what the learner will be able to
do upon the completion of the program. A carefully
designed individualized program of instruction, materials,
and media is provided for each student. Regular feedback
is given to the student to allow errors to be corrected
as the student progresses. After a student has taken as
much time as he/she needs to master the task, he/she is
required to perform at a high level of proficiency in a
job-like setting before being allowed to move to the next
task (1, 7)„
Because all educational goals in competency-based
education are defined in terms of observable behavior, any
behavior that cannot be measured directly must be excluded
from the program. The ability of a student to appreciate
literature or increase his tolerance for differences can-
not be directly measured because they are subjective in
nature or come to fruition at some future point in the
learner's life. The capacity to identify and clarify
one's ethical and moral views is also difficult to measure
because of the value judgments involved (31).
A carefully developed competency-based education
program usually results in more students mastering more
skills at higher level of proficiency than in the
16
traditional educational model. In a competency-based
education program of instruction the students identified
as lower ability, can learn and retain as much information
as the student identified as having higher ability (7).
A general plan to design, develop, implement, and
manage a competency-based educational program will include
most of the following tasks:
1. Identifying essential student prerequisites
if any;
2. Identifying and verifying necessary job tasks;
3. Analyzing job tasks and adding necessary
knowledge tasks;
4. Writing final student performance objectives;
5. Placing tasks and terminal performance objectives
in proper order;
6. Developing a performance and a written test;
7. Developing student learning manuals;
8. Piloting test materials and revising manuals;
9. Developing a learning management system;
10. Implementing the program with continual evalua-
tion (7, 43).
Research Pertaining to Competency-Based
Education
Research in competency-based education reveals the
use of several means to identify competencies: the
17
development of a checklist for validation; job analysis
of workers on the job; and the Delphi technique.
The most popular technique for defining competency
is the accepted judgment of experts (36). At the United
States Office of Education Invitational Workshop on Adult
Competency Education in February/ 1978, participants
recommended that competencies be identified by asking
individuals, agencies, employers and local and state
education officials to list needs (33). Beal (22)
expresses the view that professionals should select the
competencies with an understanding of the concerns of the
citizens being served.
Teaching competencies in Florida were determined by
the distribution of a questionnaire featuring a competency
checklist of teaching skills to public school teachers.
The teachers rated the competencies on a four-point Likert
scale and identified twenty-three competencies which showed
necessary knowledge and skills regardless of the age of the
teacher (14).
The Delphi technique is a procedure using key inform-
ants to gain consensus among experts in the field. Consensus
is achieved by having the experts complete a series of
questionnaires with controlled feedback. Although
originally a forecast tool to predict events, the technique
has been broadened to arrive at the consensus as to the
desirability of events or outcomes (33).
18
The traditional approach to competency identification
is job analysis. Klemp in Defining and Measuring Compe-
tence (36), states that competence precedes performance,
and therefore evaluation of performance identifies compe-
tence. Job analysis has been used to identify requirements
for specific jobs and these requirements produce hypotheses
about the nature of competencies needed for successful
performance of specific job tasks.
Professional Development in Physical Education
Curriculum design in the physical education profession
has historically been task oriented and therefore lent
itself to listing of psychomotor skills in teaching units.
The competencies of those who select physical education as
a profession are not clearly defined and the little
research that is available is scattered among the following
areas: teaching of physical education classes, administra-
tion of physical education programs, athletic training, and
course evaluation.
The origins of physical education as a profession can
be traced to early Greece, but professional development in
the American physical education model is recent. Until the
twentieth century, American physical education consisted of
gymnastics, physical training, or physical culture designed
to develop the student's health. There was during this
19
period, a dualism in education that separated mind and
body (18).
In the early 1900's the concept of physical education
expanded to include sports and games. Professional prepara-
tion of physical educators also expanded and in 1924, New
York University granted the first Ph.D. in physical educa-
tion (40) .
World War II created a new emphasis in sport due to
the need for national fitness. The need for fitness was
reemphasized during the Korean Conflict when large numbers
of army recruits were turned down due to poor physical fit-
ness. The President's Council for Physical Fitness was
initiated in 1958 to further the fitness of American youth
by the establishment of a national fitness test and norms
(40) .
Only recently has organized mass participation in sport
gained widespread support. Sport today is touted as a posi-
tive means of filling the leisure that is a result of
industrialization. Sport activity now claims that it eases
the various ills of modern society such as poor health,
moral decay and anti-social use of leisure. Sport is now
hard work for many and a high profit business for others
(10).
The rise of sport in America following WWII was
contributed to by the increased technology of the time and
its effect on leisure. Men returning from WW II were given
20
GI Bill bonuses for education which allowed them to go to
school without having to work. This new leisure time was
used both for participation and spectation in sport. Radio
and television made collegiate and professional sports more
accessible to Americans and helped stimulate sport (2).
The Miller Lite Report on American Attitudes Toward
Sports published in June of 1983 indicates that only 3.7
per cent of the American public do not participate in sport
as a spectator or player at least once a month. Forty-two
per cent of Americans indicate that they participate in
sport at least once a day. Swimming is the most popular
participatory activity with calisthenics, jogging, bicy-
cling, and baseball following. This high level of involve-
ment is not surprising since over half of American adults
played some type of organized sports as children (16).
In the early 1970's the professional organizations
in physical education began to recognize the value of
competency-based teacher education and the need for the
development of competencies for the various aspects of
physical education and sport. The American Alliance of
Health, Physical Education and Recreation sponsored a 1973
Conference on Professional Preparation which recommended a
competency-based approach in the areas of dance, physical
education, recreation education, safety education and
school health education. These recommendations came in a
21
document that covered the following areas in which compe-
tency should be shown:
1. Meaning and significance
2. Growth and development
3. Research foundations
4. Development of personal performance competencies
5. Modes facilitating learning
6. Administration, curriculum planning and organiza-
tion
7. Intramurals (17).
These competencies were supported in part by a critical
incident study which developed competencies for effective
teaching of courses in professional preparation in physical
educaiton (4). Douglas used needs assessment to establish
competencies for athletic training which identified both
specific subject areas and a procedure for attaining the
competencies (12). Task analysis of physical education
instructors was done as they performed duties related to
United States Public Law 9 4-142. This analysis demonstrated
that only 45 per cent had good formal training for meeting
the needs of handicapped students (6).
An early study to develop a graduate curriculum
reviewed on-the—job competencies of directors of health,
physical education and recreation. It was found that these
administrators primarily used the competencies of an
administrative and supervisory nature (8). Research
22
relating to competency development in physical education
is primarily in instruction and specialized areas such as
athletic training. The Bridgeman (8) study indicated that
a study of practitioners' on-the-job competencies was useful »
for curriculum development.
Professional Development in Recreation
The recreation movement in America closely paralleled
physical education well into the twentieth century. The
early movement was primarily concerned with acquisition of
land for parks in urban areas and some programming for
inner city populations.
Specific professional development in recreation began
in the mid-forties with the offering of separate recreation
curricula at New York University and Indiana University.
Competency-based curriculum for recreation students has
been developed extensively in therapeutic recreation litera-
ture, but is not prevalent in general recreation curriculum.
Epperson (15) identified the job duties and responsi-
bilities required of professional recreation graduates of
the Great Lakes region. The competency checklist led to
the conclusion that most park and recreation education
departments had very limited contact with alumni in the
field, that undergraduate curricula needed more emphasis
in administrative skills, and that there was an inconsis-
tency between job opportunities and needs and curriculum
23
program emphasis. These conclusions were supported by
Meier (28) in a study of master degree programs in recrea-
tion.
Recreators and recreation educators were shown to
differ in their perceptions of the importance of administra-
tion, facilities, finance, history, leadership, philosophy,
programming and research in the master's curriculum. Of
forty-six competencies identified in the master's curricu-
lum, only twenty-four were agreed upon by practitioners and
educators (29).
Competency analysis has been instrumental to the
development of therapeutic recreation curricula. The
identification of competencies in therapeutic recreation
indicates that practitioners have a more realistic percep-
tion of needed competencies than educators (26, 27).
The Delphi and critical incident technique have been
used for competency identification in recreation curricula,
but the use of competency checklists appears to be the most
common tool in identifying competencies (15, 26, 38, 39).
The philosophy for course content in recreation activity
leadership courses was determined by use of a Delphi group.
The study generated 105 concepts to be considered in leader-
ship courses (41).
24
Professional Development in Recreational Sports
The interdisciplinary nature of recreational sports
and the resulting identity problems have, until quite
recently, limited research efforts to determine competency
needs of professional recreational sports personnel.
Leaders within the profession have called for research in
the areas of curriculum development and ultimately certifi-
cation of recreational sports personnel (20, 37).
Although Elmer Mitchell (30) published the first text
on intramurals in 1925, the area did not gain its own iden-
tity until much later. The American Association for Health,
Physical Education, and Recreation created an intramural
athletics section in 1938 and in 1950, Dr. William Wasson
of Dillard University founded the National Intramural Associ-
ation (2).
As physical education placed more emphasis on skill
development, recreation focused on the preparation of
programmers and managers for non-educational settings. The
National Intramural Association focused its attention on
college intramural programs but soon began to expand into
other settings such as military bases and municipal programs,
At the same time college programs began to expand beyond the
traditional competitive programs to a more broadly based
program that included informal recreation, sport clubs,
faculty-staff programs, co-rec activities and outdoor
25
activities. In 1975 the National Intramural Association
changed its name to The National Intramural Recreational
Sports Association (NIRSA) reflecting the change in member-
ship and program areas (2).
The increased expansion and visibility of recreational
sports participation has resulted in an acknowledgement that
there is a need for well-designed and supervised recreation
programs to satisfy the needs of society. To meet these
needs, recreational sports specialists must be prepared (11),
Preparation of these specialists can be achieved only
after the core content of recreational sports has been
identified, validated, and given credibility. Identifica-
tion of needed skills for effective job performance will
add to professional preparation of recreational sports
personnel. After this knowledge base is established, learn-
ing objectives may be developed for needed coursework (42).
The general nature and status of intramural sport
courses in public higher education was determined by Cable
(9). Of 491 institutions surveyed, 50 indicated a need for
an intramural leadership course in the curriculum that
would deal with the following areas:
1. Facilities and equipment
2. Objectives of intramurals
3. Units of competition
4. Program of activities
5. Philosophy and history of intramurals
26
6. Promotion and public relations
7. Scheduling
8. Point systems and award systems
9. Health and physical welfare
10. Rules and regulations
11. Finances
12. Time allotments
13. Program evaluation
14. Principles of administration
15. Extramural activities
16. Problems related to population size (9).
Preo's (37) analysis of the effectiveness of professional
preparation of intramural directors indicated that a desirable
curriculum for recreational sports directors should include
introductory administration, recreation administration,
facility and equipment management, finance and budgeting.
The study also suggested several areas for future research
including the need to determine professional preparation for
recreational sports directors as perceived by others (37).
The National Intramural-Recreational Sports Association
has been instrumental in clarifying the definition and
identity of this multidisciplinary area. A 1975 NIRSA
position paper stressed the importance of developing an
overall position in the recognition of recreational sports
as a profession. Areas that needed differentiation from
physical education and recreation were identified as:
27
1. Broad spectrum of sports
a. Casual to highly competitive
b. Lesser to greater skilled participants
c. Casual to vigorous physical exertion
d. Relaxed to intense mental concentration
2. Stressing underlying principles of programming
a. Fun and enjoyment
b. Learning
c. Safety
d. Fitness
e. Equality
3. Four major program areas
a. Informal
b. Intramural
c. Extramural
d. Sports clubs (32).
One model showing the professional preparation of an
intramural and physical recreation program director identi-
fied formal study, conceptual skill, and practical work
experience as three major factors affecting the attainment
of managerial skills (35). The National Intramural Sports
Council (NISC), the National Association for Sport and
Physical Education (NASPE) and the American Alliance for
Health, Physical Education and Recreation (AAHPER) developed
a guide for the preparation of Intramural-Recreational
Sports Specialists which contained a rationale, definition,
28
objectives, and curriculum design for the field of recrea-
tional sports (3).
Johnson (24) indicated that there was a specific body
of knowledge necessary for success as an intramural direc-
tor. He felt that the following topics must be mastered in
intramural professional preparation:
1. Historical perspective
2. Finances, facilities and equipment
3. Units of participation
4. Scheduling and structuring tournaments
5. Rules and regulations
6. Publicity for intramural programs (24).
In 1978 Graham (20) called for certification of recre-
ational sports personnel based on a competency based assess-
ment of those who wanted to enter the profession. This
assessment should be based on levels of skill and knowledge
deemed necessary by peers.
The academic and practical experiences of recreational
sports professionals were identified by Dusing when he sur-
veyed programs listed in the NIRSA directory (13). The items
believed necessary were:
Academic
1. Recreational sports programming
2. Recreational sports administration
3. Legal concerns/liability
4. Psychology of sport
29
5. Human relations
6. Business management and procedures
7. Facility management and construction
8. Practicum and internship
9. Seminars
Practical
1. Team sports officiating
2. Pass rule exam for each sport
3. Sport/activity supervision
4. On the spot rule interpretation
5. Schedule staff
6. Conduct single and double elimination tourna-
ment
7. Conduct round robin and league programs
8. Meet organization (13).
Jamieson (23) developed twelve competency areas needed
by recreational sports personnel at the entry, middle man-
agement, and administrative level. These competency areas
were identified by surveying 100 educational institution
programs, 100 municipal settings and 100 military settings.
The competency areas are:
1. Business Procedures:
Prepare and defend a budget proposal
Know basic bookkeeping procedures
Apply purchasing policies and procedure
Examine and analyze the budget
30
Initiate effective office procedures to handle
registrations, reports, notices, etc.
Identify sources of income for budget
Prepare financial reporting statements
Prepare reports for accidents, disciplinary action,
protests, complaints, etc.
2. Communications:
Coordinate interagency cooperation
Maintain effective communications with staff
Develop publicity approaches for advertisement
Maintain effective communications with public
Prepare and develop public presentations
Identify and encourage participants for programs
Consult and advise program volunteers
3. Facility/Maintenance:
Comprehend design specifications of equipment and
facilities
Knowledge of administration of a facility reserva-
tion system
Conduct routine inspections of facilities and equip-
ment
Develop maintenance planning for facilities and
equipment
Conduct inventory and storage of supplies
Develop and maintain planning schedules for improve-
ment, construction and maintenance of facilities
31
Recognize program needs in facility design
Participate in short and long range facility
development
Report maintenance needs of facilities and
equipment
Governance:
Identify and utilize procedures to regulate the
conduct of spectators and participants
Conduct and investigate disciplinary action,
accidents, game protests and eligibility
status reports
Establish and maintain eligibility guidelines
for participants
Demonstrate ability to organize a governing or
appeals board
Understand procedures for settling protests
Establish due process for dealing with program
concerns
Prepare written documentation of cases dealing
with protests
Supervise governing or appeals board
Establish supervisory controls that prevent
participant misuse of a facility
Legality:
Comprehend legal implications in recreational
sports
32
Establish procedures reflecting fair treatment
of staff and participants
Identify and apply guidelines of legislation
involving accessibility for the handicapped
Identify and apply affirmative action guidelines
to personnel and program
Apply Title IX guidelines to personnel and program
concerns
Process contractual agreements for staffing
Process contractual agreements with other recrea-
tional sport interests
Process contractual agreements
Establish preventative measures against negligence
6. Management Techniques:
Conduct staff meetings with program personnel
Demonstrate knowledge of organizational theory
and behavior
Implement planning strategies for program
Prepare and review committee, program, and informa-
tional reports
Evaluate full-time personnel for appointment,
promotion, leave, and termination
Evaluate part-time personnel for changes in status
Utilize effective decision-making skills
Develop and maintain standards of performance
for program operations
33
Schedule part-time employees for work
Conduct visitations of other programs and
facilities
Supervise a system of volunteer personnel
Utilize time management techniques
Evaluate and document program development
Officiating:
Prepare sport rules and regulations
Procure and evaluate officials
Prepare officiating procedures not covered in
rules
Exhibit practical experience in officiating
Develop and administer rule exams
Organize and conduct clinics for officials
Handle player misconduct in game environment
Philosophy:
Recognize the philosophical values of recreational
sports to the individual
Understand a philosophical basis of recreational
sports
Understand the broad spectrum of recreational
sports opportunities
Know basic recreational sports terminology
Understand organizational and operational aspects
of sports clubs or organizations
34
Understand leadership techniques operational in
recreational sports
Understand the theories of cooperative and compet-
itive play
Differentiate between the philosophical bases of
physical education, recreation, athletics and
recreational sports
Programming Techniques:
Know procedures for dealing with recognition of
participants
Understand organizational aspects of informal
sports programming
Prepare administrative guidelines for programming
Understand organizational and operational aspects
of intramural (team, lifetime) sports program-
ming
Develop and maintain procedures for postponements
and rescheduling
Demonstrate ability to schedule tournaments,
leagues, and meets
Develop and maintain procedures for dealing with
forfeiture of games
Develop extramural games and contests
Adapt programs to the special needs of the
handicapped
35
Understand the organizational process of developing
sport instructional programs
Develop and conduct sports clinics
Demonstrate methods of securing participation
involvement in leadership roles
Develop alternative forms of competition
Observe and supervise recreational sports par-
ticipation
10. Research:
Apply statistical tools to program evaluation,
financial analysis and planning
Construct problems appropriate to recreational
sports research
Develop and analyze recreational sports aspects
of program participation statistics
Consult on sports programming and facilities
Understand the process of creative writing and
publishing
Know existing research in recreational sports
Know measuring instruments appropriate to
statistical analysis
Understand survey methods for program analysis
11. Safety/Prevention:
Recognize safety hazards which cause injury
Relate accident trends to elimination of hazards
36
Understand symptoms of injuries
Ensure safety through equipment maintenance
Develop supervisory techniques to avoid accidents
Possess necessary certification in first aid
Possess certification in water safety
Possess certification in cardiopulmonary
resuscitation
Recognize various factors that lead to accidents
Familiar with effective decision-making techniques
in dealing with accidents
Understand specific risks of sport activity
12. Sport Science:
Recognize the effect of recreational sports on
stress increase/reduction
Recognize aggression patterns of participants
Know levels of competition in sport
Recognize individual differences in exercises
Recognize certain medical considerations in
exercise
Understand the socialization process evident in
sport
Understand the effects of recreational sport
participation on personality and attitude.
The competencies identified as most needed by entry level
recreational sports personnel were: safety/accident
37
prevention, programming techniques, governance, sport
science, and philosophical foundations (8).
Research questionnaires must collect standardized,
quantifiable information from as many members of a popula-
tion as possible. To reach a national population who have
the information desired and are willing to give that
information, a mailed questionnaire is the most effective
technique (18).
A well prepared questionnaire must deal with a signifi-
cant topic that will motivate the respondent to take the
time to answer clearly and carefully. It should not seek
information available from other sources. It should be
neat, attractive, easy to understand and of reasonable
length. If jargon must be used, definitions must be given.
The data should be organized in such a manner that it is
easy to interpret and tabulate (5).
The researcher must avoid conscious or unconscious
bias in the questionnaire. Questions that may elicit super-
ficial or unthinking replies should be avoided. Care must
be taken not to reveal a preferred answer or to ask ques-
tions that may be embarrassing to the respondent (21).
Before mailing the questionnaire the researcher should
be familiar with postal regulations. Time limits must
include time for transit. Incomplete addresses will cause
delay of delivery or return of the questionnaire, so the
more complete the mailing list, the better chance for
38
delivery and return. A self-addressed, stamped envelope
must be provided for the respondent. A pattern of follow-
ups is needed to achieve maximum return (25).
Summary of Literature Review
Competency-based education has developed due to a
teacher surplus and the public demand for accountability.
This method of education is a systematic approach directed
toward specific outcomes describing exactly what the learner
can do upon completion of the program. Any behavior that
cannot be measured directly must be excluded from the pro-
gram.
Competencies are identified by development of check-
lists for validation, job analysis and the Delphi technique.
The most popular technique is to have individuals, agencies
and employers in the field list job needs. Another method
is to have workers in a field complete a questionnaire
featuring a competency checklist. Although originally a
forecast tool, the Delphi technique has been broadened to
arrive at consensus as to desirable outcomes.
The performance nature of physical education lends
itself to competency-based programs. In 1973, AAHPER
sponsored a Conference on Professional Preparation which
recommended a competency-based approach in the areas of
dance, physical education, recreation, safety, and school
health education. Competency-based curricula are prevalent
39
in therapeutic recreation, but not in general recreation
curricula.
Leaders in the profession of Recreational Sports have
called for research in the area of curriculum development.
NISC, NASPE, and AAHPER developed a guide for preparation
of Intramural-Recreational Sports Specialists in 1977 (3).
Jamieson (23) developed twelve competency areas needed by
recreational sports personnel at the entry, middle manage-
ment and administrative level.
CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. American Association of School Administrators, The Competency Movement; Problems and Solutions, Arlington, Virginia, 1978.
2. Bayless, K. G., Mull, R. F., and Ross, C. M., Recrea-tional Sports Programming, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Burgess Publishing Company, 1983.
3. Beardsley, K. P., and R. F. Mull, Professional Prepa-ration of the Intramural-Recreational Sports Specialist, Washington, D. C., AAHPER Publications, 1977.
4. Benton, C. W., "Critical Requirements for Effective Teaching in Professional Preparation Courses in Physical Education at California State Colleges," unpublished master's thesis, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, 1965.
5. Best, J. W., Research in Education, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970.
6. Bird, J. W., and B. M. Gansneder, "Preparation of Physical Education Teachers as Required Under Public Law 94-142," Exceptional Children, 45 (1975), 464-466.
7. Blank, W., Handbook for Developing Competency-Based Training Programs, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1982.
8. Bridgeman, D. F., "A Study of the Job Competencies Utilized by Directors of Health, Physical Educa-tion, and Recreation," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Springfield College, Springfield, Massachusetts, 1961.
9. Cable, D. L., "Intramural Sports Courses in Selected Institutions of Higher Education," unpublished master's thesis, University of Illinois, Chicago, Illinois, 1965.
10. Chu, D., Dimensions of Sport Studies, New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1982.
40
41
11. Daniels, M. A., "Professionalism, Can It Be Attained?" in Intramural-Recreation Sports; New Directions and Ideas, Corvallis, Oregon, Benton Printers, 1980.
12. Douglas, J. W., "Professional Preparation in Athletic Training: An Experimental Curriculum, " JOHPER, 47 (May, 1976), 40-41.
13. Dusing, M. J., "An Analysis of the Academic Preparation of the Recreational Sports Specialist," unpub-lished paper presented at Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1979.
14. Dziuban, C. D., and T. J. Sullivan, "Teaching Compe-tencies: An Investigation of Emphases," Clearing House, 59 (1978), 422-424.
15. Epperson, A. F., "A Profile of Selected Personal and Professional Characteristics of Recent Graduates from Recreation and Park Curriculums in the NRPA Great Lakes Region," unpublished doctoral disser-tation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1973.
16. Finn, P., et al., Miller Lite Report on American Atti-tudes Towards Sports 1983, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Miller Brewing Company, 1983.
17. Freedman, M. S., "The Design, Implementation and Revision of Systematic Units of Instruction for a College Course in Intramurals," Proceedings from the 1976 NIRSA Conference, San Diego, California, 1976
18. Freeman, W. H., Physical Education in a Changing Society, Boston, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1977.
19. Gay, L. R., Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Application, Columbus, Ohio, Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1976.
20. Graham, P. J., "Certification of Intramural-Recreational Sports Personnel: Is it Needed?" in Theoretical and Operational Aspects of Recreational Sports, edited by T. P. Sattler, P. J. Graham, and D. C. Bailey, West Point, New York, Leisure Press, 1978.
21. Hillway, T., Handbook of Educational Research, New York, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1969.
42
22. Ingle, R., M. R. Carroll, and W. J. Gephart, editors, The Assessment of Student Competency in the Public Schools, A CEDR Monograph, Bloomington, Indiana, Phi Delta Kappa, 1978.
23. Jamieson, L. M., "A Competency Analysis of Recreational Sports Personnel in Selected Institutional Settings," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1980.
24. Johnson, J., "Preparing the Intramural Director: A Practical Approach," Proceedings from the 1976 NIRSA Conference, San Diego, California, 27th Annual, 1976.
25. Jones, R. H., Methods and Techniques of Educational Research, Danville, Illinois, Interstate Printers and Publisher, Inc., 1973.
26. Kennedy, D. W., "A Competency Analysis of Therapeutic Recreation Graduates of Different Educational Levels," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 1978.
27. Kurtz, M., "Development of a Generic Professional Core of Competency-Based Recreation Courses for Undergraduates," unpublished doctoral disserta-tion, Michigan State University, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1976.
28. Meier, J. F., "Recipients of the Master of Science Degree in Recreation at Indiana University: An Analysis of Their Backgrounds, Motives, Professional Aspirations, Educational Experi-ences," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1973.
29. Merkeley, M. P., "The Identification of Core Competen-cies at the Master's Degree Level in Recreation at Kansas State University," unpublished master's thesis, Kansas State University, Lawrence, Kansas, 1975.
30. Mitchell, E. D., Intramural Sports, New York, A. S. Barnes and Company, 1939.
31. Monjam, S. V., and S. M. Gassner, Critical Issues in Competency Based Education, New York, Pergamon Press, 1979.
43
32. National Intramural-Recreational Sports Association, Newsletter, November-December, 197 5.
33. Parker, J. T., and P. G. Taylor, The Delphi Survey, CBAE Through the Eyes of Leading Educators, Belmont, California, Fearon Pitman Publishers, Inc., 1980.
34 Parnell# D., The Case for Competency-Based Education, Bloomington, Indiana, The Phi Delta Kappa Educa-tional Foundation, 1978.
35. Peterson, J. A., and L. Preo, editors, Intramural Director Handbook, West Point, New York, Leisure Press, T977.
36. Pottinger, P. S., and J. Goldsmith, Defining and Measuring Competence, New Directions for Experi-mental Learning, Washington, Jossey-Bass Inc., 1979.
37. Preo, L. S., "A Comparative Analysis of Current Status and Professional Preparation of Intramural Direc-tors," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer-sity of Illinois, Chicago, Illinois, 1973.
38. Rainwater, A. B., "Comparative Analysis of Competencies for Therapeutic Recreation Technician II and Therapeutic Recreation Leader Practitioners in Therapeutic Recreation," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, 1978.
39. Smith, S. H., "Practitioners' Evaluation of College Courses, Competencies and Functions in Thera-peutic Recreation," Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 4 (1976), 152-156.
40. Van Dalen, D. B., and B. L. Bennett, A World History of Physical Education, 2nd ed., Englewood Cliffs, n7 J-r Prentice-Hall, 1971.
41. Wingerter, E. J., "Utilization of the Delphi Technique in Determining Philosophy for Inclusion and Content of a Recreation Activity Leadership Course in a Four-Year Leisure Studies Curriculum," unpublished master;s thesis, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1977.
44
42. Young, L. M. , "Competency Areas in Recreational Sports," in Intramural-Recreational Sports; New Directions and Ideas, Corvallis, Oregon, Benton Printers, 1980.
43. Zieky, M. J., and S. A. Livingston, Manual for Setting Standards on the Basic Skills Assessment Test, Princeton, New Jersey, Educational Testing Ser-vice, 1977.
CHAPTER III
PROCEDURES
The nationwide scope of the study required a mailed
questionnaire be sent to the respondents. Similar tech-
niques in competency analysis studies (5) have shown the
advantages of wide scope, accurate data, and standard
results from this technique.
The sample for this study were the chairpersons of
physical education and recreation departments at four-year
institutions of higher education. The respondents were
from 67 institutions that were listed in the 1982 SPRE-NRPA
Curriculum Catalog with an enrollment of more than 10,000
students. Although there are approximately 500 institutions
that offer professional preparation in parks and recreation,
those institutions that are listed in the SPRE Catalog are
those that feel it is important to provide detailed infor-
mation about their programs to the public. The SPRE
Catalog lists 101 four-year institutions with degree pro-
grams in recreation and parks (6). Sixty-seven of these
institutions have an enrollment of 10,000 or more. These
institutions are located in thirty-two states and two
Canadian provinces. See Appendix E for a listing of
institutions and enrollments. This minimum number was an
45
46
attempt to have separate departments of recreation and
physical education. Smaller schools would be more likely
to have a combined program. The instrument was sent to the
chairpersons of both the physical education and recreation
departments at each institution.
Two factors play an important part in increasing
response rate for mailed questionnaires. The first is to
motivate the respondents in the initial contact or cover
letter by personalization, guarantee of anonymity, and type
of appeal. The type of appeal may be egotistic (your
opinion is important), altruistic (please help), or social
unity (your opinion will help the profession). Physical
characteristics of the questionnaire and cover letter have
very limited effects on response rate (9).
The second factor in response rate is follow-up
reminders to respondents through repeated mailings (9).
Replicating the mailed questionnaire techniques used in the
Jamieson (4) study, each subject was sent a copy of the
Jamieson Recreational Sports Competency Analysis (Appendix
A) with a cover letter (Appendix B) requesting their assis-
tance and a self-addressed, stamped envelope. Each
envelope was marked with a code number to identify the
respondent.
Fourteen days after the original mailing, a postcard
(Appendix C) was sent to all persons who had not responded
to the instrument, reminding them of the need to respond.
47
An additional follow-up letter (Appendix D), a copy of the
instrument, and a self-addressed envelope were mailed to
the remaining non-respondents twenty-eight days after the
original mailing.
When each envelope was returned, the respondent was
checked off the mailing list and the Jamieson Recreational
Sports Competency Analysis was given a data processing code
number identifying it only as from a physical education
chair or a recreation chair. No attempt was made to
identify the respondent for each instrument.
Following the mailed questionnaire format used by
Jamieson (4), the responses were transferred from the
returned instrument to an 80 Character Data Coding Form. A
response of "Not Applicable" to a statement was given a
value of zero; a response of "Below Average Importance" was
given a value of one; a response of "Average Importance"
was given a value of two; and a response of "Above Average
Importance" was given a value of three. Failure to respond
to a statement was treated as missing data and was given a
value of four.
The data were then placed on IBM Character Data Cards
for analysis by an IBM 370 Computer located at the Univer-
sity of Kentucky. The data was fed to the computer by the
BATCH System at Eastern Kentucky University. The Statis-
tical Package for the Social Science, Version H, M, and G,
48
was used to provide condescriptive data for each of the 112
competency statements and the 12 competency areas. An
analysis of variance between the populations was performed
for each of the twelve competency areas.
A review of the literature related to competency
identification suggests that a response rate of 60 per cent
from each population was needed for the study (3). The
previously noted techniques were used to achieve the
necessary rate of return.
Selection of the Instrument
The Jamieson Recreational Sports Competency Analysis,
hereafter referred to as JRSCA, was developed by Jamieson
(4) to determine the competencies needed among professional
levels of recreational sports personnel in educational,
municipal, and military settings. The instrument is based
on the following twelve competency areas for recreational
sports personnel:
1. Management Technique
2. Programming Technique
3. Legality
4. Governance
5. Philosophical Foundation
6. Business Procedures
7. Communications
8. Officiating
49
f
9. Safety/Accident Prevention
10. Sport Science
11. Facility Maintenance
12. Research
These twelve competency areas were drawn from a review
of the literature which included: basic texts in recreation,
physical education and recreational sports; professional
preparation guides in each of the fields; competency-based
education texts and research; and taxonomies for educational
objectives. Jamieson also consulted the Certification
Committee of the National Intramural Recreational Sports
Association to establish the competency areas.
A jury of twelve professionals who were either
nationally prominent in recreational sports, had evidence
of involvement in curriculum design, and/or had published
in areas related to the problem were selected to review
the competency statements. Each statement was rated by
the jury on a five-point Likert-like scale as follows:
1. Essential—Of Utmost Importance
2. Very Important
3. Average Importance
4. Questionable Importance
5. Unnecessary
A criterion score of three was needed for the competency
statement to be retained as valid (2, 8, 10).
50
One hundred nineteen competency statements were
generated by the jury of experts and presented in a
scrambled list. The JRSCA was pilot tested on twenty pro-
fessionals in the recreational sports area to further test
the instrument for validity and to establish reliability.
The respondents in the pilot study rated the statements on
a three-point Likert-type or priority-ranking scale as
follows:
3 = Above Average Importance
2 = Average Importance
1 = Below Average Importance
NA = Not Applicable
At the conclusion of the pilot test, 112 statements
were retained for inclusion in the questionnaire. A total
of 300 survey instruments was mailed to full-time recrea-
tional sports administrators, 100 to educational settings,
100 to municipal settings, and 100 to military settings.
A return rate of 50.6 per cent usable questionnaires was
achieved. Descriptive statistics and univariate analysis
of variance were used to deal with specific sub-problems
and all twelve competency areas were accepted as applicable
to some professional level of recreational sports (4).
Research Design
This study is designed to identify competency areas
needed for entry level recreational sports personnel as
51
perceived by chairpersons of physical education and recrea-
tion departments at four-year institutions of higher
learning. A three-point scale was used to determine if
competency statements are of no importance, below average
importance, average importance, or above average importance.
The resulting criterion scores for each statement were
compared with existing scores developed from data supplied
by Jamieson from the 1980 study of recreational sports
practitioners. The scale, while ordinal, can be considered
interval in nature due to the indefinite numerical distance
between 0, 1, 2, and 3, on the scale (1).
One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the
populations on each of the twelve competency areas. The
analysis of variance provides a test of the hypothesis of
equal means, which is the equivalence of the T-test. The
null hypothesis tested by the one way analysis of variance
is that there is no significant difference between the
parameters represented by the mean square between and the
mean square within populations. If the calculated F-ratio
equals or exceeds the .05 level of significance, the
hypothesis is rejected, and a significant difference in the
means of population is determined to exist (7). The sig-
nificant F-ratio indicates a real difference between groups,
a difference too large to consider chance as the probable
cause (11).
52
The independent variables consist of the three profes-
sional groups responding to the questionnaire: practitioners
of recreational sports, physical education department chair-
persons, and recreation department chairpersons. The depen-
dent variables consist of the twelve competency statements.
The design is a fixed model because the respondent
groups were selected from a specific population rather than
randomly selected. Therefore, the results of the analysis
may only be generalized to the respondent groups surveyed.
A significance level of .05 was established. This
level of significance will aid the elimination of Type I
errors. The F test was used to determine the measure of
significance in the design. This test determined if there
was a significant difference between respondent groups for
each of the twelve competency areas.
CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Borg, W. R., and M. D. Gall, Educational Research, An Introduction, New York, David McKay Company, Inc., 1974.
2. Deppe, T. R., "An Evaluation of Selected Techniques Used for Inservice Training of Professional Recreation Personnel," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1953.
3. Hall, G. E., and H. L. Jones, Competency-Based Educa-tion : A Process for the Improvement of Education, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, 1976.
4. Jamieson, L. M., "A Competency Analysis of Recreational Sports Personnel in Selected Institutional Settings," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1980.
5. Kennedy, D. W., "A Competency Analysis of Therapeutic Recreation Graduates of Different Educational Levels," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 1978.
6. National Recreation and Park Association, Curriculum Catalog 1981-1982 Biennial Directory, Arlington, Virginia, 1981.
7. Roscoe, J. T., Fundamental Research Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1975.
8. Schroth, R. J., "Effects of Local Governmental Struc-ture on Budgetary Procedures of Municipal Parks and/or Recreation Departments," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1978.
9. Tull, D. S., and D. I. Hawkins, Marketing Research: Measurement and Method, New York, Macmillian Publishing Co., Inc., 1980.
53
54
10. Uibel, H. F., "Recruitment Procedures and Selection Criteria of Selected Commercial Recreation Enterprises with Implications for Position Open-ing and Professional Preparation," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1977.
11. Weber, J. C., and D. R. Lamb, Statistics and Research in Physical Education, St. Louis,"C. V. Mosby Company, 1970.
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
The problem of this study was to identify and compare
the competencies needed for entry level recreational sports
personnel as perceived by chairpersons of physical education
and recreation departments of professional preparation.
These results were then compared to data from recreational
sports practitioners collected by Jamieson in a 1980 study.
Descriptive analysis of the data produced the top
twenty individual competency statements as perceived by
physical education and recreation department chairpersons
as well as a rank order of the twelve competency areas by
each of the two populations. Analysis of variance was used
to compare the findings for the twelve competency areas
from the two populations with the data from the Jamieson
(1) study. The F-ratios were calculated and the level of
significance required for accepting an hypothesis was set
at .05. The hypotheses were stated as follows:
1. The competencies identified as most needed for
entry level recreational sports personnel by chairpersons
of physical education departments will differ significantly
from the competencies identified by chairpersons of recrea-
tion departments.
55
56
2. The competencies identified as most needed for
entry level recreational sports personnel by chairpersons
of physical education departments will differ significantly
from the competencies identified by recreational sports
practitioners.
3. The competencies identified as most needed for
entry level recreational sports personnel by chairpersons
of recreation departments will differ significantly from
the competencies identified by recreational sports practi-
tioners.
Table I reveals a response of 79.1 per cent of the
total population was received from both the physical educa-
tion and recreation chairpersons. Several respondents in
TABLE I
PERCENTAGE OF RESPONSES OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND RECREATION CHAIRPERSONS TO THE SURVEY
Population N Surveys Returned
Per Cent Returned
Usable Returns
Per Cent Usable Returns
Physical Education Chairpersons 67 53 79.1 46 68.5
Recreation Chairpersons 67 53 79.1 48 71.64
each population returned the questionnaire unanswered due
to their lack of knowledge of the area. A usable response
57
of 68.65 per cent of the total population was obtained from
physical education chairpersons and a usable response of
71.64 per cent of the total population was obtained from
recreation chairpersons.
A three-point priority-ranking scale was used to
determine if each competency statement was of above average
importance (3), average importance (2), below average impor-
tance (1), or no importance (0). The twenty competency
statements given the highest average value (criterion
ratings) by physical education chairpersons were:
1. Recognizes safety hazards that cause
injury 2.913
2. Maintains effective communication
with staff 2.783
3. Utilizes effective decision-making
skills 2.705
4. Comprehends legal implications in
recreational sports 2.696
5. Recognizes various factors that lead
to accidents 2.667
6. Understands the philosophical basis
of recreational sports 2.652
7. Prepares sport rules and regulations 2.652
8. Understands specific risks of sport
activity 2.644
58
9. Demonstrates ability to schedule
tournaments, leagues, and meets 2.630
10. Identifies and encourages partici-
pants for programs 2.630
11. Conducts and investigates disci-
plinary action, accidents, game
protest, and eligibility status
reports 2.622
12. Identifies and utilizes procedures
to regulate the conduct of spectators
and participants 2.600
13. Develops supervisory techniques to
avoid accidents 2.600
14. Prepares reports of accidents, dis-
ciplinary action, protest, complaints,
etc- 2.578
15. Establishes procedures reflecting
fair treatment of staff and partici-
pants 2.568
16. Familiar with effective decision-
making techniques in dealing with
accidents 2.568
17. Knows basic recreational sports
terminology 2.565
18. Establishes preventative measures
against negligence 2.558
59
19. Relates accident trends to elimination
of hazards 2.556
20. Conducts routine inspections of
facilities and equipment 2.556
The nineteen competency statements given an average
value of 2.500 or above by recreation chairpersons were:
1. Recognizes safety hazards that cause
injury 2.896
2. Maintains effective communications
with staff 2.833
3. Utilizes effective decision-making
skills 2.687
4. Prepares sport rules and regulations 2.687
5. Knows levels of competition in sport 2.667
6. Understands the philosophical basis
of recreational sports 2.667
7. Demonstrates ability to schedule
tournaments, leagues, and meets 2.667
8. Relates accident trends to elimina-
tion of hazards 2.604
9. Recognizes various factors that lead
to accidents 2.604
10. Comprehends legal implications in
recreational sports 2.583
11. Ensures safety through equipment
maintenance 2.542
60
12. Prepares and defends budget proposal 2.521
13. Establishes procedures reflecting fair
treatment of staff and participants 2.521
14. Understands symptoms of injury 2.521
15. Understands the broad spectrum of
recreational sports opportunities 2.521
16. Establishes preventative measures
against negligence 2.521
17. Implements planning strategies for
programs 2.521
18. Understands leadership techniques
operational in recreational sports 2.500
19. Familiar with effective decision-
making technique in dealing with
accidents 2.500
The average criterion scores for each competency
statement in a competency area were averaged to produce
a criterion score for each of the twelve competency areas.
Chairpersons of physical education departments ranked the
competency areas as follows:
1. Philosophical Foundations 2.485
2. Safety/Accident Prevention 2.388
3. Communications 2.347
4. Governance 2.341
5. Officiating 2.324
61
6. Programming Techniques 2.300
7. Sport Science 2.293
8. Management Techniques 2.152
9. Legality 2.133
10. Facilities/Maintenance 2.103
11. Business Procedures 2.095
12. Research 1.760
The chairpersons of recreation departments ranked
comeptency areas as follows
1. Philosophical Foundations 2. 479
2. Safety/Accident Prevention 2. 339
3. Communications 2. 331
4. Governance 2. 288
5. Management Techniques 2. 267
6. Programming Techniques 2. 266
7. Legality 2. 248
8. Facilities/Maintenance 2. 229
9. Business Procedures 2. 227
10. Sport Science 2. 185
11. Officiating 2. 060
12. Research 1. 804
Practitioners of recreational sports as surveyed in
the Jamieson (1) study ranked the competency areas as
follows:
1- Safety/Accident Prevention 2.180
62
2. Sport Science 2.064
3. Philosophical Foundations 2.015
4. Officiating 1.938
5. Programming Techniques 1.905
6. Communications 1.884
7. Governance 1.753
8. Facilities/Maintenance 1.645
9. Management Techniques 1.438
10. Legality 1.245
11. Business Procedures 1.203
12. Research 1.167
Table II reveals the level of significance between
populations for each of the competency areas. Analysis
of variance between responses of physical education
and recreation chairpersons produced a significant F-ratio
at the .05 level for the competency area of officiating.
Physical education chairpersons' responses generated a
larger criterion score for the competency area of
officiating than did the responses of recreation chair-
persons .
Analysis of variance between responses of physical
education chairpersons and recreational sports practi-
tioners produced significant F-ratios at the 0.05 level
for the competency areas of business procedures, communi-
cations, facilities/maintenance, governance, legality,
TABLE II
LEVEL OF F-RATIO SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS
63
Competency Area
Recreation Physical Education
Recreation vs.
Practitioner
Physical Education
vs. Practitioner
Business Procedures 0.168 0.001* 0.001*
Communications 0.757 0.001* 0.001*
Facilities/ Maintenance 0.268 0.001* 0.001*
Governance 0.464 0.001* 0.001*
Legality 0.130 0.001* 0.001*
Management Techniques 0.235 0.001* 0.001*
Officiating 0.011* 0.397 0.004*
Philosophical Foundations 0.922 0.001* 0.001*
Programming Techniques 0.797 0.001* 0.002*
Research 0.799 0.001* 0.001*
Safety/Accident Prevention 0.432 0.244 0.113
Science 0.477 0.206 0.091
*F-ratio significant at .05 level.
64
management techniques, officiating, philosophical founda-
tions, programming techniques, and research. For all
competency areas the physical education chairpersons gave
a larger criterion score than did the recreational sports
practitioners.
Analysis of variance between responses of recreation
chairpersons and recreational sports practitioners produced
significant F-ratios at the 0.05 level for the competency
areas of business procedures, communications, facilities/
maintenance, governance, legality, management techniques,
philosophical foundations and research. For all competency
areas the recreation chairpersons gave a larger criterion
score than did the recreational sports practitioners.
Table III reveals mean scores, F-ratios, and their
level of significance for comparison of the responses of
recreation chairs, physical education chairs, and recrea-
tional sports practitioners for the competency area of
business procedures. The mean score responses of recreation
chairs was 2.227 while physical education chairs responses
produced a mean score of 2.095. The F-ratio for this com-
parison was 1.937 which has a level of significance of 0.168,
This indicates a degree of agreement on the relative impor-
tance of the competency area of business procedures as
perceived by recreation and physical education chairs.
The responses of recreational sports practitioners
produced a mean of 1.203. Comparison with the responses
65
of recreation chairs produced an F-ratio of 56.012. When
comparison was made against responses of physical education
chairs there was a significance of 0.001. These values
indicate a significant difference between responses of both
recreation and physical education chairs when compared with
responses of recreational sports practitioners. Both
academic groups gave the competency area of business pro-
cedures more importance than did practitioners.
TABLE III
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS AREA 1—BUSINESS PROCEDURES
Recreation Chairs vs. Physical Education Chairs
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.227 Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.095 F-Ratio 1.937 Level of Significance 0.168
Recreation Chairs vs. Practitioners
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.227 Practitioners Mean 2.203 F-Ratio 92.022 Level of Significance 0.001
Physical Education Chairs vs. Practitioners
Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.095 Practitioners Mean 1.203 F-Ratio 56.012 Level of Significance 0.001
No significance was produced in the F-ratio between
mean score responses of recreation chairs (2.331) and
physical education chairs (2.347) for the competency area
of communications as shown in Table IV. The F-ratio of
66
0.096 has a level of significance of 0.757. The academic
groups perceive a non-significant differences in the value
of the competency area of communications for entry level
recreational sports personnel.
TABLE IV
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS AREA 2—COMMUNICATIONS
Recreation Chairs vs. Physical Education Chairs
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.331 Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.347 F-Ratio 0.096 Level of Significance 0.757
Recreation Chairs vs. Practitioners
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.331 Practitioners Mean 1.884 F-Ratio 18.491 Level of Significance 0.001
Physical Education Chairs vs. Practitioners
Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.347 Practitioners Mean 1.884 F-Ratio 17.922 Level of Significance 0.001
The responses of recreational sports practitioners
generated a mean score of 1.884. When compared to the
responses of recreation chairs the F-ratio of 18.491 was
found to be significant at the 0.001 level. Comparisons to
the physical education chairs score produced an F-ratio of
17.922 which was significant at the 0.001 level. Both
recreation chairs and physical education chairs perceived
the competency area of communications to be of more
67
importance for entry level recreational sports personnel
than did the practitioners of recreational sports.
Table V reveals a significance level of 0.268 for the
F-ratio of 1.246 generated in comparison of the recreation
chairs mean of 2.229 and the physical education chairs mean
of 2.103 for the competency area of facilities/maintenance.
This indicates that there was no significant difference in
the value of this competency area as perceived by chairs of
preparatory departments.
TABLE V
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS AREA 3--FACILITIES/MAINTENANCE
Recreation Chairs vs. Physical Education Chairs
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.229 Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.10 3 F-Ratio • 1.246 Level of Significance 0.268
Recreation Chairs vs. Practitioners
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.229 Practitioners Mean 1.645 F-Ratio 30.052 Level of Significance 0.001
Physical Education Chairs vs. Practitioners
Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.103 Practitioners Mean 1.645 F-Ratio 17.575 Level of Significance 0.001
When the mean of 1.64 5 given by recreational sports
practitioners was compared to the recreation chairs mean
an F-ratio of 3 0.052 was produced. A F-ratio of 17.575
68
was produced when the recreational sports practitioners
mean was compared to that of the physical education chairs.
Both F-ratios were significant at the 0.001 level which
shows that educators give the competency area of facilities/
maintenance more value than did recreational sports practi-
tioners .
As shown in Table VI, there was a significance level
of 0.922 in the F-ratio of 0.542 produced when the mean of
2.288 for responses of recreation chairs and 2.341 for
responses of physical education chairs were compared for
the competency area of governance. This non-significant
F-ratio suggests general agreement on the value of the
TABLE VI
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS AREA 4—GOVERNANCE
Recreation Chairs vs. Physical Education Chairs
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.288 Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.341 F-Ratio 0.542 Level of Significance 0.922
Recreation Chairs vs. Practitioners
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.288 Practitioners Mean 1.753 F-Ratio 19.737 Level of Significance 0.001
Physical Education Chairs vs. Practitioners
Physical Education Chairs Mean . . . . . . . . 2.341 Practitioners Mean . . . 1.753 F-Ratio . . 23.081 Level of Significance . . . . 0.001
69
competency area of governance as perceived by recreation
and physical education chairs.
When compared with recreation and physical education
chairs, the mean of 1.753 for recreational sports practi-
tioners was significant at the 0.001 level for both F-
ratios. The F-ratio between responses of recreation chairs
and practitioners was 19.737 and the F-ratio between
responses of physical education chairs was 23.081. Again
both recreation and physical education chairs responses
gave the competency area of governance a larger value than
did recreational sports practitioners.
Table VII reveals a mean of 2.248 for responses of
recreation chairs and a mean of 2.133 for the responses of
physical education chairs for the competency area of legal-
ity. A comparison of these means produced an F-ratio of
2.342 which was non-significant at the 0.130 level.
The mean of 1.245 for the responses of recreational
sport practitioners produced F-ratios of 93.396 when com-
pared to recreation chairs and 58.613 when compared to
physical education chairs. These F-ratios were significant
at the 0.001 level and show that although there was agree-
ment between recreation and physical education chairs on
the value of the competency area of legality, there was a
significant difference in the response of recreational
sports practitioners when compared to recreation and
physical education chairs.
70
TABLE VII
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS AREA 5—LEGALITY
Recreation Chairs vs. Physical Education Chairs
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.248 Physical Education Chairs Mean . . . . . . . . 2.133 F-Ratio 2.342 Level of Significance 0.130
Recreation Chairs vs. Practitioners
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.248 Practitioners Mean 1.245 F-Ratio 93.396 Level of Significance 0.001
Physical Education Chairs vs. Practitioners
Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.133 Practitioners Mean 1.245 F-Ratio 58.613 Level of Significance 0.001
Table VIII deals with the analysis of variance between
populations for the competency area of management techniques,
The responses of recreation chairs produced a mean of 2.267
while responses of physical education chairs produced a mean
of 2.152. Analysis produced an F-ratio of 1.431 which has a
level of significance of 0.235. Academic chairs had very
little difference in their perception of the value of the
competency area of management techniques for entry level
recreational sports personnel.
There was a significant difference at the 0.001 level
between the means of academic chairs and the mean of 1.438
for recreational sports practitioners. The F-ratio for
71
recreation chairs and practitioners was 61.873 while the
F-ratio was 36.288 for physical education chairs and prac-
titioners. Academic chairs responses gave a higher value
than did recreational sports practitioners for the compe-
tency area of management techniques.
TABLE VIII
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS AREA 6—MANAGEMENT
Recreation Chairs vs. Physical Education Chairs
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.267 Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.152 F-Ratio 1.431 Level of Significance 0.235
Recreation Chairs vs. Practitioners
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.267 Practitioners Mean 1.438 F-Ratio 61.873 Level of Significance 0.001
Physical Education Chairs vs. Practitioners
Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.152 Practitioners Mean . 1.438 F-Ratio 36.288 Level of Significance 0.001
The competency area of officiating produced a signifi-
cant F-ratio between the responses of recreation and physi-
cal education chairs as shown in Table IX. The mean for
recreation chairs responses was 2.060 while the mean for
physical education chairs responses was 2.324. Analysis
produced an F-ratio of 6.722 which was significant at the
72
0.011 level. This reflects the greater importance of rules
and officiating in the physical education curriculum.
TABLE IX
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS AREA 7 — OFFICIATING
Recreation Chairs vs. Physical Education Chairs
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.060 Physical Education Chairs Mean . . 2.324 F-Ratio 6.722 Level of Significance 0.011
Recreation Chairs vs. Practitioners
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.060 Practitioners Mean 1.938 F-Ratio 0.722 Level of Significance . . . . . 0.397
Physical Education Chairs vs. Practitioners
Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.324 Practitioners Mean 1.938 F-Ratio 8.378 Level of Significance 0.004
The F-ratio between responses of recreation chairs and
the mean response of recreational sports practitioners of
1.938 was 0.722 which was not significant. The F-ratio
between responses of physical education chairs and practi-
tioners was 8.738 which was significant at the 0.004 level.
The value given the competency area of officiating was
lowest by practitioners, but differed significantly only
when compared to physical education chair responses. Physi-
cal education responses also differed significantly from
the responses of recreation chairs.
73
A comparison of mean responses of 2.479 for recreation
chairs and 2.485 for physical education chairs produced an
F-ratio of 0.010. This was not significant at the 0.922
level for the competency area of philosophical foundations
as shown in Table X. The non-significant F-ratio reflects
general agreement on the value of the competency area for
entry level recreational sports personnel.
TABLE X
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS AREA 8—PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATIONS
Recreation Chairs vs. Physical Education Chairs
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.479 Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.485 F-Ratio 0.010 Level of Significance 0.922
Recreation Chairs vs. Practitioners
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.479 Practitioners Mean 2.015 F-Ratio 21.190 Level of Significance 0.001
Physical Education Chairs vs. Practitioners
Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.485 Practitioners Mean 2.015 F-Ratio 18.629 Level of Significance 0.001
A comparison of the mean response of 2.015 for recrea-
tional sports practitioners with both academic groups
produced significance at the 0.001 level. The F-ratio
between responses of recreation chairs and practitioners
was 21.190 while the F-ratio between responses of physical
74
education chairs and practitioners was 18.629. The compe-
tency area of philosophical foundations received the highest
value for any area from each academic group while practi-
tioners rated it lower in value for entry level recreational
sports personnel.
The responses of academic chairs and recreational
sports practitioners for the competency area of programming
techniques are shown in Table XI. The mean score for recre-
ation chairs was 2.266 while the mean score for physical
education chairs was 2.300. Analysis of those means pro-
duced an F-ratio of 0.067 which was non-significant at the
0.797 level.
TABLE XI
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS AREA 9—PROGRAMMING TECHNIQUES
Recreation Chairs vs. Physical Education Chairs
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.226 Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.300 F-Ratio 0.067 Level of Significance 0.797
Recreation Chairs vs. Practitioners
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.266 Practitioners Mean . . . 1.905 F-Ratio . . 11.273 Level of Significance 0.001
Physical Education Chairs vs. Practitioners
Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.300 Practitioners Mean 1.905 F-Ratio 9.803 Level of Significance 0.002
75
The responses of recreational sports practitioners
generated a mean score of 1.90 5. When compared with the
recreation chairs mean, an F-ratio of 11.27 3 was produced.
This F-ratio was significant at the 0.001 level. Compari-
son of the practitioners mean score with that of the
physical education chairs produced an F-ratio of 9.803
which was significant at the 0.002 level. While the two
academic groups were in agreement on the value of program-
ming techniques, they both differed significantly with the
perceptions of recreational sports practitioners.
Table XII displays the analysis of the competency area
of research. The mean scores for the area were: 1.804 for
recreation chairs, 1.760 for physical education chairs, and
1.167 for recreational sports practitioners. An F-ratio of
0.065 was generated when the mean of the academic groups
were compared. This was non-significant at the 0.7 99 level
of significance.
A significance of 0.001 was produced when the practi-
tioners mean was compared to recreation chairpersons.
The F-ratio was 35.619. An F-ratio of 24.802 was produced
when a comparison was made with physical education chairs
responses. This F-ratio was also significant at the 0.001
level. Although the competency area of research received
the lowest mean value for each of the three groups, the
responses of academic chairs differed significantly from
those of recreational sports practitioners.
76
TABLE XII
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS AREA 10—RESEARCH
Recreation Chairs vs. Physical Education Chairs
Recreation Chairs Mean 1.804 Physical Education Chairs Mean 1.760 F-Ratio 0.065 Level of Significance 0.799
Recreation Chairs vs. Practitioners
Recreation Chairs Mean 1.804 Practitioners Mean 1.167 F-Ratio 35.619 Level of Significance 0.001
Physical Education Chairs vs. Practitioners
Physical Education Chairs Mean 1.760 Practitioners Mean 1.167 F-Ratio 24.082 Level of Significance 0.001
The competency area of safety/accident prevention was
given high scores from each of the three groups producing
non-significant levels between groups. The mean value
given by recreation chairs was 2.339 while the mean from
physical education chairs was 2.388. Table XIII shows an
F-ratio of 0.626 which was not significant at the 0.432
level, when the academic chairs responses were compared.
When compared with the practitioners mean of 2.180 the
recreation chairs mean produced an F-ratio of 1.368 which
was not significant at the 0.244 level. The F-ratio for
the comparison with physical education chairs was 2.546
with a significance level of 0.113. The competency area of
77
TABLE XIII
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS AREA 11—SAFETY/ACCIDENT PREVENTION
Recreation Chairs vs. Physical Education Chairs
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.339 Physical Education Chairs Mean . . . . . . . . 2.388 F-Ratio 0.626 Level of Significance 0.432
Recreation Chairs vs. Practitioners
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.339 Practitioners Mean 2.180 F-Ratio 1.368 Level of Significance . 0.244
Physical Education Chairs vs. Practitioners
Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.388 Practitioners Mean 2.180 F-Ratio 2.546 Level of Significance 0.113
safety/accident prevention was the most agreed upon compe-
tency area and should have a strong place in any recrea-
tional sports curriculum.
Table XIV reveals no significant difference in the
values given by the three populations for the competency
area of sport science. The mean value for recreation chairs
responses was 2.185 while the mean value from physical
education chairs responses was 2.293. This produced an
F-ratio of 0.512 and a level of significance of 0.477.
When compared to the practitioners mean values of
2.064 the recreation chairs values generated an F-ratio of
1.613 and a level of significance of 0.206. A comparison
78
TABLE XIV
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN POPULATIONS AREA 12—SPORT SCIENCE
Recreation Chairs vs. Physical Education Chairs
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.18 5 Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.293 F-Ratio 0.512 Level of Significance 0.477
Recreation Chairs vs. Practitioners
Recreation Chairs Mean 2.185 Practitioners Mean 2.064 F-Ratio 1.613 Level of Significance 0.206
Physical Education Chairs vs. Practitioners
Physical Education Chairs Mean 2.293 Practitioners Mean 2.064 F-Ratio 2.901 Level of Significance 0.091
of practitioners and physical education chairs responses
produced an F-ratio of 2.901 and a level of significance
of 0.091. The three populations are in general agreement
on the value of the competency area of sport science for
entry level recreational sports personnel.
CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY
Jamieson, L. M., "A Competency Analysis of Recreational Sports Personnel in Selected Institutional Settings," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1980.
79
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS,
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The problem investigated by this study was the
identification of the competency areas most needed for
entry level recreational sports personnel as perceived by
chairpersons of college and university physical education
and recreation departments. Furthermore, this study sought
to determine if the competency areas identified by physical
education and recreation chairpersons differed significantly
from the competency areas identified by recreational sports
practitioners in an earlier study.
The Jamieson Recreational Sports Competency Analysis
was mailed to chairpersons of both the physical education
and recreation departments at colleges and universities
listed in the 1982 Society of Park and Recreation
Educators—National Recreation and Park Association
Curriculum Catalog as having an enrollment of over 10,000
students. A self-addressed stamped envelope and a letter
requesting assistance with the study was also sent to each
chairperson. A follow-up post card was mailed to non-
respondents fourteen days after the original mailing and
80
;
81
an additional letter, envelope, and instrument was mailed
to non-respondents twenty-eight days after the original
mailing. These procedures generated a usable return of
over 65 per cent from both populations. The data from the
earlier study of recreational sports practitioners was
supplied by Jamieson.
The data were coded and analyzed using descriptive
statistics and the analysis of variance procedure. The
data were separated by individual competency statements,
competency areas, and populations. The .05 level of
significance was required to accept the hypotheses.
Findings
The findings of this study are presented by popula-
tions to indicate importance of competency areas. There
is also a comparison between populations. The chairpersons
of physical education departments identified the rank order
of the competency areas needed for entry level recreational
sports personnel as:
1. Philosophical Foundations 2.485
2. Safety/Accident Prevention 2.388
3. Communications 2.347
4. Governance 2.341
5. Officiating 2.324
6. Programming Techniques 2.300
7. Sport Science 2.29 3
82
8. Management Techniques 2.152
9. Legality 2.133
10. Facilities/Maintenance 2.103
11. Business Procedures 2.095
12. Research 1.760
The chairpersons of recreation departments identified
the rank order of the competency areas needed for entry
level recreational sports personnel as:
1. Philosophical Foundatiions 2.479
2. Safety/Accident Prevention 2.339
3. Communications 2.331
4. Governance 2.288
5. Management Techniques 2.267
6. Programming Techniques 2.266
7. Legality 2.248
8. Facilities/Maintenance 2.229
9. Business Procedures 2.227
10. Sport Science 2.185
11. Officiating 2.060
12. Research 1.804
Practitioners of recreational sports ranked the
competency areas as follows:
1. Safety/Accident Prevention 2.180
2. Sport Science 2.064
3. Philosophical Foundations 2.015
4. Officiating 1.938
83
5. Programming Techniques 1.905
6. Communications 1.884
7. Governance 1.7 53
8. Facilities/Maintenance 1.645
9. Management Techniques 1.438
10. Legality 1.245
11. Business Procedures 1.203
12. Research 1.167
It was hypothesized that there would be a significant
difference between criterion scores of competencies
identified by the chairpersons of physical education and
recreation departments. The findings indicate a signifi-
cant F ratio for the competency area of officiating.
Therefore, this hypothesis must not be rejected for the
competency area of officiating, but must be rejected for
the other eleven areas.
A comparison of the criterion scores given the compe-
tency areas by physical education and recreation chairper-
sons produced a significant F ratio for the competency area
of officiating. The competency areas of philosophical
foundation, safety/accident prevention, communications
and governance were ranked as the first four areas by each
population, while the area of research was ranked last by
each population.
84
A comparison of the criterion scores produced in the
competency areas by recreation chairpersons and recreational
sports practitioners produced significant F-ratios for the
competency areas of business procedures, communications,
facilities/maintenance, governance, legality, management
techniques, research, philosophy and programming techniques.
No significant F-ratios were found for the competency areas
of officiating, safety/accident prevention, and sport
science. The criterion scores given by the recreation
chairpersons were larger for all areas than those given by
recreational sports practitioners.
It was hypothesized that there would be significant
differences between criterion scores of the competency
areas as identified by chairpersons of recreation depart-
ments and recreational sports practitioners. The findings
indicted a significant F-ratio for nine of the twelve
competency areas. Therefore, the hypotheses must not be
rejected for those nine competency areas and must be
rejected for the other three areas.
A comparison of the criterion scores produced for the
competency areas by physical education chairpersons and
recreational sports practitioners produced significant F-
ratios for the competency areas of business procedures,
communications, facilities/maintenance, governance,
legality, management techniques, officiating, philosophical
foundations, programming techniques, and research. No
85
significant F-ratios were found for the areas of safety/
accident prevention and sport science. The criterion scores
produced by the physical education chairpersons responses
were larger than those produced by the recreational sports
practitioners responses in all competency areas.
It was hypothesized that there would be a significant
difference between criterion scores of the competency area
identified by chairs of physical education departments and
recreational sports practitioners. The findings indicate
a difference for ten of the twelve competency areas. There-
fore, the hypotheses must not be rejected for those ten
competency areas and must be rejected for the other two
competency areas.
Conclusions
The findings of this study suggest the following
conclusions:
1. Recreation curricula should give more importance
to the area of officiating in the preparation of recrea-
tional sports specialists. Recreation chairs ranked
officiating eleventh even though application of rules
through officiating is a major factor in game safety.
Recreation chairs ranked safety second in importance.
2. Specific classes dealing with safety, first aid
and accident prevention should be included in all
curricula. This competency area was perceived as being
86
first in importance by recreational sports practitioners
and second in importance by chairs of preparatory depart-
ments .
3. Curricula for entry level recreational sports
personnel should be changed to include more practical
skills such as officiating, programming, business and
management techniques and less in the area of philosophical
foundations. A better balanced blend of theoretical knowl-
edge and practical skills is needed for entry level person-
nel.
4. At the present time there is little difference
between the perceptions of recreation and physical chairs
for preparation of entry level recreational sports person-
nel. The only significant difference is for the competency
area of officiating which physical education chairs perceive
as being more important than do recreation chairs.
Recommendations
This study determined the importance of competency
areas for entry level recreational sports personnel as
perceived by chairpersons of physical education and recrea-
tion departments at institutions of higher learning with
an enrollment of over 10,000 students. The following
recommendations are offered to enhance preparation of
recreational sports specialists:
87
1. Since all entry level personnel are not produced
by large institutions with separate physical education and
recreation departments, a study of preparatory departments
at institutions with smaller enrollments or combined depart-
ments would broaden the data base for needed curriculum
revisions.
2. A study to determine competencies used by recrea-
tional sports personnel during their first two years in a
full-time professional position would also supply data that
would be useful in curriculum revision. These professionals
would be in a unique position to identify entry level compe-
tencies.
3. The National Intramural Recreational Sports Associ-
ation should, on the basis of this study and the Jamieson
study, take a stronger role in influencing the professional
preparation of personnel entering the field. Accreditation
of curriculum cannot be justified on the basis of two
research projects, but substantial data has been generated
that identifies the unique blend of skills needed for entry
level recreational sports personnel. Curricula which can
verify inclusion of these components should be recognized.
4. Institutions interested in the preparation of
recreational sports personnel should examine this study to
help determine needed components. Specific course require-
ments can be obtained from the National Intramural Recrea-
tional Sports Association Curriculum Package.
88
5. Both physical education and recreation departments
should investigate adoption of courses to deal with various
age groups in sports as well as traditional public school
and collegiate settings.
6. The competency area of research should not be
included as a separate course in the preparation of entry
level recreational sports personnel, but should be intro-
duced in other courses. All three populations perceived
research as the least important competency area for
preparation of entry level recreational sports personnel.
APPENDIX
89
APPENDIX A
90
JAMIESON RECREATIONAL SPORTS COMPETENCY ANALYSIS The field of recreational sports is viewed as an interdisciplinary blend of physical education and recreation. It exists in
pecialized form in many settings; military, municipal, educational, correctional, commercial-private, industrial and quasi-
ublic. It is not known, however, to what extent training needs exist in this field.
The following survey is designed to permit you, chairpersons of preparatory departments, to provide input relative to the
ompetencies needed by entry level recreational sports personnel. The following definitions provide a guide for appropriately
nswering the questionnaire.
Recreational Sports Competitive activity in game form engaged in during leisure.
Informal Sports Self-directed competitive activities in game form.
Intramural Sports Structured, competitive activity in game form with groups within local setting.
Extramural Sports Structured, competitive activities in game form that are organized with groups outside the local setting.
Club Sports Groups organized because of a common interest in competitive activity in game form.
Competency A composite skill behavior or knowledge.
Entry Level Activity specialist, face-to-face leader.
'LEASE NOTE: The data received from this questionnaire will be analyzed and interpreted anonymously with no reference to the name of
lie respondent. Such names will be kept in confidence and will not be used for interpretation of analysis of results. Thank you for taking time to complete this questionnaire. Please return in the enclosed stamped, self-addressed envelope as
oon as possible to: M. Wayne Jennings, Begley 202, Recreational Sports, Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, Kentucky 0475.
Competency Analysis istructions: Place a circle around the choice in each scale that indicates the importance of the competency statement.
ley NA Not Applicable 1 Below average importance 2 Average importance 3 Above average importance
1. Prepares and defends a budget proposal NA 1 2 3
2. Coordinates interagency cooperation NA 1 2 3
3. Comprehends design specifications of equipment and facilities NA 1 2 3
4. Identifies and utilizes procedures to regulate the conduct of spectators and participants NA 1 2 3
5. Comprehends legal implications in recreational sports NA 1 2 3
6. Conducts staff meetings with program personnel NA 1 2 3
7. Prepares sport rules and regulations NA 1 2 3
8. Recognizes the philosophical values of recreational sports to the individual NA 1 2 3
9. Knows procedures for dealing with recognition of participants NA 1 2 3
10. Applies statistical tools to program evaluation, financial analysis and planning NA 1 2 3
11. Recognizes safety hazards which cause injury NA 1 2 3
12. Recognizes the effect of recreational sports on stress increase/reduction NA 1 2 3
Key NA Not Applicable 92 1 Below average importance 2 Average importance 3 Above average importance
13. NA 1 2 3
14. NA 1 2 3
15. Knowledge of administration of a facility reservation system NA 1 2 3
16. Conducts and investigates disciplinary action, accidents, game protests and eligibility NA 1 2 3
17. Establishes procedures reflecting fair treatment of staff and participants NA 1 2 3
18. Demonstrates knowledge of organizational theory and behavior NA 1 2 3
19. NA 1 2 3
20. Understands a philosophical basis of recreational sports NA 1 2 3
21. Understands organizational aspects of informal sports programming NA 1 2 3
22. Constructs problems appropriate to recreational sports research NA 1 2 3
23. Relates accident trends to elimination of hazards NA 1 2 3
24. Recognizes aggression patterns of participants NA 1 2 3
25. Applies purchasing policies and procedures NA 1 2 3
26. Develops publicity approaches for advertisement NA 1 2 3
27. Conducts routine inspections of facilities and equipment NA 1 2 3
28. Establishes and maintains eligibility guideline for participants NA 1 2 3
29. Identifies and applies guidelines of legislation involving accessibility for the handicapped NA 1 2 3
30. Implements planning strategies for program NA 1 2 3
31. Prepares administrative guidelines for programming NA 1 2 3
32. Prepares officiating procedures not covered in rules NA 1 2 3
33. Understands the broad spectrum of recreational sports opportunities NA 1 2 3
34. Understands organizational and operational aspects of intramural (team, lifetime) sports programming NA 1 2 3
35. Develops and analyzes recreational sports aspects of program participation statistics NA 1 2 3
36. Understands symptoms of injuries NA 1 2 3
37. Knows levels of competition in sport NA 1 2 3
38. Examines and analyzes the budget NA 1 2 3
39. Maintains effective communications with public NA 1 2 3
40. Develops maintenance planning for facilities and equipment NA 1 2 3
41. Demonstrates ability to organize a governing or appeals board NA 1 2 3
42. Identifies and applies affirmative action guidelines to personnel and program NA 1 2 3
43. Prepares and reviews committee, program and informational reports NA 1 2 3
44. Exhibits practical experience in officiating NA 1 2 3
45. Knows basic recreational sports terminology NA 1 2 3
46. Develops and maintains procedures for postponements and rescheduling NA 1 2 3
47. Ensures safety through equipment maintenance NA 1 2 3
48. Recognizes individual differences in exercises NA 1 2 3
ey NA Not Applicable 9 3 1 Below average importance 2 Average importance 3 Above average importance
19. Initiates effective office procedures to handle registrations, reports, notices, etc NA 1 2 3
50. Prepares and develops public presentations NA 1 2 3
51. Conducts inventory and storage of supplies NA 1 2 3
52. Understands procedures for settling protests NA 1 2 3
53. Evaluates full-time personnel for appointment, promotion, leave and termination NA 1 2 3
54. Develops and administers rule exams * NA 1 2 3
55. Understands organizational and operational aspects of sports clubs or organizations NA 1 2 3
56. Consults 6n sports programming and facilities NA 1 2 3
57. Develops supervisory techniques to avoid accidents NA 1 2 3
58. Recognizes certain medical considerations in exercise NA 1 2 3
59. Identifies sources of income for budget NA 1 2 3
50. Identifies and encourages participants for programs NA 1 2 3
51. Develops and maintains planning schedules for improvement, construction and maintenance
of facilities ^ A 1 2 3
52. Recognizes program needs in facility design NA 1 2 3
53. Establishes due process for dealing with program concerns NA 1 2 3
54. Applies Title IX guidelines to personnel and program concerns NA 1 2 3
65. Evaluates part-time personnel for changes in status NA 1 2 3
66. Organizes and conducts clinics for officials NA 1 2 3
67. Understands leadership techniques operational in recreational sports NA 1 2 3
68. Demonstrates ability to schedule tournaments, leagues and meets NA 1 2 3
69. Understands the process of creative writing and publishing NA 1 2 3
70. Possesses necessary certification in first aid NA 1 2 3
71. Processes contractual agreements for staffing . NA 1 2 3
72. Processes contractual agreements with other recreational sport interests NA 1 2 3
73. Utilizes effective decision-making skills NA 1 2 3
74. Develops and maintains procedures for dealing with forfeiture of games NA 1 2 3
75. Develops extramural games and contests NA 1 2 3
76. Prepares organizational guidelines for staffing and programming NA 1 2 3
77. Adapts programs to the special needs of the handicapped NA 1 2 3
78. Knows existing research in recreational sports NA 1 2 3
79. Develops and maintains standards of performance for program operations NA 1 2 3
80. Understands the organizational process of developing sport instructional programs NA 1 2 3
81. Schedules part-time employees for work NA 1 2 3
82. Develops and conducts sports clinics NA 1 2 3
83. Possesses certification in water safety NA 1 2 3
84. Demonstrates methods of securing participation involvement in leadership roles NA 1 2 3
85. Possesses certification in cardiopulmonary resuscitation NA 1 2 3
Key NA Not Applicable g
1 Below average importance 2 Average importance 3 Above average importance
Prepares financial reporting statements NA 1 2 3
Consults and advises program volunteers NA 1 2 3
Participates in short and long range facility development NA 1 2 3
89. Prepares written documentation of cases dealing with protests NA 1 2 3
90. Processes contractual agreements NA 1 2 3
91. Conducts visitations of other programs and facilities NA 1 2 3
92. Develops schedules or contracts for officials NA 1 2 3
93. Understands the theories of cooperative and competitive play NA 1 2 3
Develops alternate forms of competition NA 1 2 3
Knows measuring instruments appropriate to statistical analysis NA 1 2 3
Recognizes various factors that lead to accidents NA 1 2 3
Understands the socialization process evident in sport . NA 1 2 3
Prepares reports for accidents, disciplinary action, protests, complaints, etc NA 1 2 3
Reports maintenance needs of facilities and equipment NA 1 2 3
Supervises governing or appeals board NA 1 2 3
Establishes preventative measures against negligence NA 1 2 3
102. Supervises a system of volunteer personnel NA 1 2 3
103. Handles player misconduct in game environment NA 1 2 3
104. Differentiates between the philosophical bases of physical education, recreation, athletics and
recreational sports NA 1 2 3
105. Observes and supervises recreational sports participants NA 1 2 3
Understands survey methods for program analysis NA 1 2 3
Familiar with effective decision-making techniques in dealing with accidents NA 1 2 3
Understands the effects of recreational sport participation on personality and attitude NA 1 2 3
Utilizes time management techniques NA 1 2 3
110. Evaluates and documents program development NA 1 2 3
111. Understands specific risks of sport activity NA 1 2 3
112. Establishes supervisory controls that prevent participant misuse of a facility NA 1 2 3
General Inquiry Instructions: Please answer the following general questions to determine your views about recreational sports professional
preparation.
1. Do you believe that there should be specific undergraduate preparation of recreational sports professionals? Yes No
2. Do you believe that there should be specific graduate preparation of recreational sports professionals? Yes No
3. Do you believe that there should be continuing education programs for recreational sports professionals? Yes No
4. Do you believe that there should be in-service training programs for recreational sports professionals? Yes No
APPENDIX B
95
EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY Richmond, Kentucky 40475 9 6
COLLEGE OF HEALTH, PHYSICAL EDUCATION, RECREATION, AND ATHLETICS
Department of HPER&A Services
September 16, 1982
Dear Colleague:
I need your help as part of ray doctoral program at North Texas State University. I am conducting a research project with the purpose of identifying entry level competencies for recreational sports personnel. The curriculum that these people have followed in their academic preparation influences the competencies that they have when they seek to aiter the field of Recreational Sports.
You, as director of an academic program preparing these students, have a unique influence on their preparation. Your concepts greatly influence the emphasis in your curriculum and therefore the competencies of your students. It is my hope that you will assist in my research by filling out the enclosed Jamieson Recreational Sports Competency Analysis. Your responses, I assure you, will be held in the strictest of confidence.
The success of the research is dependent upon your response. It is iterative to the integrity of the research that you respond to the questionnaire without consultation with the Recreational Sports professionals on your campus, as their input will be achieved in another manner.
This study is being partially funded by a research grant from the National Intramural Recreational Sports Association and I hope to have the results for the NIRSA Professional Development Conference to be held in Louisville, Kentucky after the NRPA Conference in late October.
Thank you very much for your time and effort in increasing the body of knowledge in Recreational Sports. I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Most Sincerely,
M. Wayne Jennings Director Intramural Recreational Sports
APPENDIX C
97
98
October 5, 1982
Dear Colleague,
It has been two weeks since the Initial mailing of the "Jamieson Recreational Sports Competency Analysis". My research is depen-dent upon your response. Would you please com-plete the questionnaire and return it as quickly as possible.
Your help will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
M.. Wayne Jennings Director, Intramural Recreational Sports
APPENDIX D
99
EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY 100
Richmond, Kentucky 40475 - 0934
COLLEGE OF HEALTH, PHYSICAL EDUCATION, RECREATION, AND ATHLETICS
Department of HPER&A Services
October 18, 1982
Dear Colleague:
On September 16, 1982, you were mailed a copy of the "Jamieson Recreational Sports Competency Analysis" as part of a study to identify needed competencies for entry level recreational sports personnel. Although I have received many returns, a response from you and your institution will greatly enhance the results of this study. I hope you will take a few minutes and contribute to the body of knowledge in recreational sports.
I am enclosing another copy of the questionnaire and a stamped envelope for your convenience. Thank you for your time and efforts.
Sincerely,
M. Wayne Jennings Director
Intramural Recreational Sports
MWJ/ar
Enclosure
APPENDIX E
101
RESPONDENTS TO QUESTIONNAIRE
102
Institution
NORTHEAST UNITED STATES
Boston University
Monticlair State College
New York University
Pennsylvania State University
Slippery Rock State College
Temple University
University of New Hampshire
University of Toledo
Physical Education Response
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Recreation Response
X
X
X
X
X
SOUTHEAST UNITED STATES
Auburn University
Clemson University
Eastern Kentucky University
Marshall University
North Carolina State University
Old Dominion University
Virginia Commonwealth University
University of Florida
University of Georgia
University of Kentucky
University of Maryland
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
103
Institution
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
University of South Alabama
University of Southern Mississippi
University of Tennessee
MIDWEST UNITED STATES
Central Michigan Unviersity
Eastern Illinois University
Indiana University
Iowa State University
Kansas State University
Kent State University
Mankato State University
Michigan State University
Northeastern Illinois University
Northeastern University
Ohio State University
Purdue University
Southern Connecticut State College
Southern Illinois University
University of Illinois, Urbana
University of Iowa
University of Minnesota
University of Missouri
Physical Education Response
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Recreation Response
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
104
Institution
University of Nebraska, Omaha
University of North Dakota
University of Northern Iowa
Wayne State University
Western Illinois University
NORTHWEST UNITED STATES
California State University Sacramento
Oregon State University
San Francisco State University
San Jose State University
University of Oregon
University of Utah
Western Washington University
Physical Education Response
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Recreation Response
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES
Arizona State University
California State University, Northridge
California State University, Long Beach
North Texas State University
Oklahoma State University
San Diego State University
Texas A & M University
X
X
X
X
X
X
105
Institution
Texas Tech University
University of Arizona
University of Colorado
University of Northern Colorado
Physical Education Response
X
X
X
Recreation Response
X
X
X
Canada
University of British Columbia
Waterloo University
106
RESPONDENTS TO QUESTIONNAIRE
BY ENROLLMENT
Institution Enrollment P. E. Rec.
Response Response
Ohio State University 54,462 X X
University of Minnesota 47,386 X X
Northeastern University 46,152 X X
New York University 45,524 X
Michigan State University 44,940 X X
Arizona State University 38,000
University of Maryland 36,905
University of Illinois,
Urbana 34,792 X X
Texas A & M University 33,499 X X
Wayne State University 33,408 X X
Pennsylvania State University 32,936 X X
San Diego State University 32,465
Purdue University 32,000 X
Slippery Rock State College 31,881 X X
California State University,
Long Beach 31,239 X X
Temple University 31,000 X X
Indiana University 30,380 X
University of Florida 30,000 X
University of Arizona 28,854 X X
University of Tennessee 27,803 X X
University of Missouri 27,306 X X
107
Institution Enrollment P. E. Rec. Response Response
University of British Columbia 27,044
California State University,
Northridge 26,449 X
University of Iowa 25,100 X X
San Francisco State
University 24,120 X X
San Jose State University 24,074 X
Southern Illinois University 23,236 X X
University of Kentucky 23,125 X X
Texas Tech University 23,043 X X
University of Utah 22,970 X X
Iowa State University 22,301 X X
University of Georgia 22,000 X
California State University 21,555
North Carolina State
University 21,200 X X
Oklahoma State University 20,790
University of Colorado 20,653 X X
University of North Carolina,
Chapel Hill 20,451 X X
University of Toledo 20,270 X
Kent State University 18,938 X X
Kansas State University 18,334 X X
Auburn University 18,329 X
Boston University 17,400 X
University of Oregon 17,379 X X
108
Institution Enrollment P. E. Rec.
Response Response
North Texas State University 17,178 X X
Virginia Commonwealth 17,096
Oregon State University 17,000 X X
Central Michigan University 16,912 X X
Old Dominion University 15,139 X X
Waterloo University 14,885
Montclair State College 14,696 X X
University of Nebraska,
Omaha 14,472 X X
Eastern Kentucky University 14,081 X X
University of New Hampshire 12,624 X X
Indiana State University 12,34 3 X X
Western Illinois University 11,904 X X
Marshall University 11,856 X X
Southern Connecticut State College 11,705 X X
University of Northern
Colorado 11,700
Mankato State University 11,616 X X
Clemson University 10,891 X X
University of Northern Iowa 10,600 X X
University of Southern Mississippi 10,471 X X
Northeastern Illinois Univer-sity 10,346 X X
University of South Alabama 10,117 X X
109
Institution Enrollment P. E. Rec. Response Response
University of North Dakota 10,117 X X
Eastern Illinois University 10,038 X X
Western Washington Univer-sity 10,033 X X
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Bayless, K. G., R. F. Mull, and C. M. Ross, Recreational Sports Progamming, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Burgess Publishing Company, 1983.
Beardsley, K. P., and R. F. Mull, Professional Preparation of the Intramural-Recreational Sports Specialist, Washington, D. C., AAHPER Publications, 1977.
Best, J. W., Research in Education, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970.
Blank, W. E., Handbook for Developing Competency-Based Training Programs, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1982.
Borg, W. R., Applying Educational Research, New York, Longman Inc., 1981.
Borg, W. R., and M. Gall, Educational Research, An Intro-duction, New York, David McKay Company, Inc., 1974.
Burns, R. W., and J. L., Klingstedt, editors, Competency-Based Education, An Introduction, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Educational Technology Publications, 1973.
Chu, D., Dimensions of Sport Studies, New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1982.
Finn, P., et al., Miller Lite Report on American Attitudes Towards Sports 1983, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Miller Brewing Company, 1983.
Freeman, W. H., Physical Education in a Changing Society, Boston, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1977.
Gay, L. R., Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Application, Columbus, Ohio, Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1976.
Hall, G. E., and H. L. Jones, Competency-Based Education; it. Process for the Improvement of Education, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice-Hall, 1976.
110
Ill
Hillway, T., Handbook of Educational Research, New York, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1969.
Jones, R. H., Methods and Techniques of Educational Research, Danville, Illinois, Interstate Printers and Publisher, Inc., 1973.
Mitchell, E. D., Intramural Sports, New York, A. S. Barnes and Company, 1939.
Monjam, S. V. , and S. M. Gassner, Critical Issues in Competency Based Education, New York, Pergamon Press, 1979.
Mueller, P., and J. W. Reznik, Intramural Recreational Sports; Programming and Administration, New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1979.
Nixon, J. E., and A. E. Jewett, Physical Education Curricu-lum, New York, Ronald Press Co., 1964.
Parker, J. T., and P. G. Taylor, The Delphi Survey, CBAE Through the Eyes of Leading Educators, Belmont, California, Fearon Pitman Publishers, Inc., 1980.
Parnell, D. The Case for Competency-Based Education, Bloomington, Indiana, The Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation, 1978.
Peterson, J. A., and L. Preo, editors, Intramural Director Handbook, West Point, New York, Leisure Press, 1977.
Pottinger, P. S., and J. Goldsmith, Defining and Measuring Competence, New Directions for Experimental Learning, Washington, Jossey-Bass Inc., 1979.
Roscoe, J. T., Fundamental Research Statistics for the Behavioral Sciencs, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1975.
Tull, D. S., and D. I. Hawkins, Marketing Research: Measurement and Method, New York, Macmillian Publish-ing Co. Inc., 1980.
Van Dalen, D. B., and B. L. Bennett, A World History of Physical Education, 2nd ed., Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice-Hall, 1971.
Weber, J. C., and D. R. Lamb, Statistics and Research in Physical Education, St. Louis, C. V. Mosby Company, 1971.
112
Zieky, M. J., and S. A. Livingston, Manual for Setting Standards on the Basic Skills Assessment Test, Princeton, New Jersey, Educational Testing Service, 1977.
Articles
Bird, J. W. , and B. M. Gansneder, "Preparation of Physical Education Teachers as Required Under Public Law 94-142," Exceptional Children, 45 (1975), 464-466.
Blumberg, H. H., C. Fuller, and A. P. Hare, "Response Rates in Postal Surveys," Public Opinion Quarterly, (Spring, 1974), 113-123.
Daniels, M. A., "Professionalism, Can It Be Attained?" in Intramural-Recreation Sports; New Directions and Ideas, Corvallis, Oregon, Benton Printers, 1980.
Douglas, J. W., "Professional Preparation in Athletic Training: An Experimental Curriculum," JOHPER, 47 (May, 1976), 40-41.
Dziuban, C. D., and T. J. Sullivan, "Teaching Competencies: An Investigation of Emphases," Clearing House, 5 9 (1978), 422-424.
Graham, P. J., "Certification of Intramural-Recreational Sports Personnel: Is it Needed?" in Theoretical and Operational Aspects of Recreational Sports, edited by T. P. Sattler, P. J. Graham, and D. C. Bailey, West Point, New York, Leisure Press, 1978.
Jamieson, L. M., "A Competency Analysis of Recreational Sports Personnel in Selected Institutional Settings," NIRSA Journal, 7 (1982), 20-24.
Preo, L. S., "Professional Preparation of Administrators of Intramural and Physical Recreation Program," in Intra-mural Administration, Theory and Practice, edited by J. A. Peterson, West Point, New York, Leisure Press, 1977.
Smith, S. H., "Practitioners' Evaluation of College Courses, Competencies and Functions in Therapeutic Recreation," Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 4 (1976), 152-156.
Young, L. M., "Competency Areas in Recreational Sports," in Intramural-Recreational Sports: New Directions and Ideas, Corvallis, Oregon, Benton Printers, 1980.
113
Ziegler, E., "Intramurals, Profession, Discipline or Part Thereof?" in Intramural Administration: Theory and Practice, edited by J. A. Peterson, Englewood Cliffs,
J., Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976.
Publications of Learned Organizations
American Association of School Administrators, The Compe-tency Movement; Problems and Solutions, Arlington, Virginia, 1978.
Freedman, M. S., "The Design, Implementation and Revision of Systematic Instruction for a College Course in Intramurals," Proceedings from the 1976 NIRSA Confer-ence, San Diego, California, 1976.
Ingle, R. B., M. R. Carroll, and W. J. Gephart, editors, The Assessment of Student Competency in the Public Schools, A CEDR Monograph, Bloomington, Indiana, Phi Delta Kappa, 1978.
Johnson, J., "Preparing the Intramural Director: A Practi-cal Approach," Proceedings from the 1976 NIRSA Confer-ence , San Diego, California, 1976.
National Intramural-Recreational Sports Association, Newsletter, November-December, 1975.
National Recreation and Park Association, Curriculum Catalog 1981-82 Biennial Directory, Arlington, Virginia, 1981.
Unpublished Materials
Benton, C. W., "Critical Requirements for Effective Teaching in Professional Preparation Courses in Physical Education at California State Colleges," unpublished master's thesis, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, 1965.
Bridgeman, D. F., "A Study of the Job Competencies Utilized by Directors of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Springfield College, Springfield, Massachusetts, 1961.
Cable, D. L., "Intramural Sports Courses in Selected Institutions of Higher Education," unpublished master's thesis, University of Illinois, Chicago, Illinois, 1965.
114
Deppe, T. R., "An Evaluation of Selected Techniques Used for Inservice Training of Professional Recreation Personnel," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1953.
Dusing, M. J., "An Analysis of the Academic Preparation of the Recreational Sports Specialist," unpublished paper presented at Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1979.
Epperson, A. F., "A Profile of Selected Personal and Professional Characteristics of Recent Graduates from Recreation and Park Curriculums in the NRPA Great Lakes Region," unpublished doctoral disserta-tion, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1973.
Hotchkiss, Mandy, "Agreement Assessment of Recreational Sport Terminology," unpublished master's thesis, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1982.
Jamieson, Lynn M., "A Competency Analysis of Recreational Sports Personnel in Selected Institutional Settings," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1980.
Kennedy, D. W., "A Competency Analysis of Therapeutic Recreation Graduates of Different Educational Levels," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 1978.
Kurtz, M., "Development of a Generic Professional Core of Competency-Based Recreation Courses for Undergradu-ates," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1976.
Meier, J. F., "Recipients of the Master of Science Degree in Recreation at Indiana University: An Analysis of Their Backgrounds, Motives, Professional Aspirations, Educational Experiences," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1973.
Merkeley, M. P., "The Identification of Core Competencies at the Master's Degree Level in Recreation at Kansas State University," unpublished master's thesis, Kansas State University, Lawrence, Kansas, 1975.
Preo, L. S., "A Comparative Analysis of Current Status and Professional Preparation of Intramural Directors," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Chicago, Illinois, 1973.
115
Rainwater, A. B., "Comparative Analysis of Competencies for Therapeutic Recreation Technician II and Thera-peutic Recreation Leader Practitioners in Therapeutic Recreation," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, 1978.
Schroth, R. J., "Effects of Local Governmental Structure on Budgetary Procedures of Municipal Parks and/or Recreation Departments," unpublished doctoral disser-tation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1978.
Uibel, H. F., "Recruitment Procedures and Selection Criteria of Selected Commercial Recreation Enter-prises with Implications for Position Opening and Professional Preparation," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1977.
Wingerter, E. J., "Utilization of the Delphi Technique in Determining Philosophy for Inclusion and Content of a Recreation Activity Leadership Course in a Four-Year Leisure Studies Curriculum," unpublished master's thesis, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1977.