Dissertation

Although the proportion of student athletes graduating from college has increased in the past few decades, approximately 45 percent of Division I-A football players and 60 percent of basketball players do not graduate (NCAA, “Graduation Success Rate Report”). Is the institution responsible for the 45 percent of football players and 60 percent of basketball players who do not graduate when the average graduation rate for typical students at these same universities is roughly the same? Yes.

The typical university does not usually recruit students to study history, philosophy, or engineering. The typical student chooses to attend a university—often with much more preparedness than the student-athlete. But the university will recruit football and basketball players to play their respective sports. These students are promised an education and the potential for a professional career (and the income and fame that comes with the professional career). The institution has something tangible to gain from the student-athlete. So, yes, the institution is responsible for that 45 percent and 60 percent of students who do not graduate from the institution.

Student athletes are a unique subset of college students, and a one-size fits all curriculum often does not work. The student-athlete’s needs and limitations often surpass the needs and limitations of their student peers. My dissertation addresses these needs and how alternative programs and pedagogies can benefit the underprepared student-athlete. While the specific population for my dissertation study are athletes at a Division I-A institution, the programs and pedagogies can be modified for other marginalized groups of students.

1. Working Outline of Dissertation
2. Introduction
3. Literature Review
4. Methodology
5. Ethnographic Study
6. Alternative Programs and Pedagogies
7. Findings and Analysis

Comments

[Gregory Zobel]

I wonder if one of those alternative pedagogies could be applying similar notions of training, working hard, repetition, going over plays (rhetorical or structural moves?) again and again, seeing the audience as opponent as well as ally, perseverance, etc. Virtually every solid aspect from sport training could apply to writing training or academic training.

Students are your teammates.
Teacher is your coach.
Nobody can make the play, run, throw for you.
There is no miracle overnight solution.
And so on and so on. The similarities are so obvious to me. Is it me, or is it possible that our field, comp/rhet, and possibly our entire region, humanities, does not want to accept the values that training bodies can teach us?

And, as writing coaches/teachers, aren't we obligated to demonstrate or ability and skill--just like Sensei being able to demonstrate moves on the mat--if we expect respect?