The status of athletic department ATOD policies has received limited attention. Few studies have examined the extent to which athletic trainers are currently involved in developing and revising their drug education and prevention policies. This study compared the perceptions of head athletic trainers from NCAA member Divisions I, II and III toward the status of their current ATOD policies and what they would ideally like to see in their athletic departments. Policy issues were related to each of the following four domains, 1) policy implementation; 2) educational programs; 3) ATOD policy enforcement; 4) athletic trainer participation in developing and evaluating ATOD policies. A web-based questionnaire was designed to collect data. Responses were collected from (353) head athletic trainers at three NCAA member institutions. Conveying ATOD policies to visiting student athletes related to the use of drugs banned by the NCAA during recruitment visits was the highest priority among HATS in three NCAA divisions. Athletic trainers from all divisions wanted to see ATOD education programs scheduled closer to athletic events when the potential for drug use could increase. Drug enforcement policies related to the consequences of testing positive for using a banned drug after a second or a third time by athletes was a high priority for Division I and III HATS. Division II trainers reported that mandatory drug testing was also a high priority. More Division I NCAA member institutions had evaluated their ATOD policies during the past year compared to Division I and III members. Participation in developing and revising athletic department and team ATOD policies was an important priority for head athletic trainers. HATS who were more involved in developing ATOD policies mentioned that they gained a better understanding of drug abuse and drug testing issues when they were part of their athletic departments' policy making process. / Graduation date: 2004

Many reforms in athletic training education requirements have been taking place in order to strengthen the profession. This research project may help make educational institutions aware of the current changes and requirements in clinical education. The purpose of this study was to determine the current practices in athletic training clinical education at National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) institutions and accredited versus non-accredited athletic training institutions.The participants (N = 93) consisted of a purposeful sample of head athletic trainers representing accredited and non-accredited athletic training education programs in the three divisions of the NCAA. The on-line survey instrument developed for this study, Current Practices in Athletic Training Clinical Education, obtained information about the demographics, clinical education of athletic training students, and the certified athletic trainer coverage of sports at NCAA institutions. The instrument was posted on an Internet website through the inQsit computer program. The respondents consisted of 28 (30.4%) head athletic trainers from Division I, 34 (37.0%) from Division II, and 30 from Division III (32.6%). Thirty-four (38.2%) respondents represented accredited athletic training education programs, 20 (22.5%) from athletic training programs in candidacy, and 35 (39.3%) from non-accredited or internship programs. Data was analyzed through percentages and frequency counts, and trend analysis and nonparametric Pearson chi square analyses. Pearson chi-square analyses revealed that Division I permits athletic training students to cover individual skill sessions and informal summer workouts unsupervised more often than the other NCAA divisions. Chi-square analyses also found that athletic training students at accredited athletic training education programs were more likely to possess CPR and first-aid certification and education on the prevention of disease transmission. A trend analysis was performed to determine the amount of time freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and seniors spent in direct clinical supervision, supervised field experience, and unsupervised field experience. A linear relationship was found with respect to direct clinical supervision, and quadratic relationships were found with respect to supervised and unsupervised field experience. The results also revealed that athletic training programs that are accredited or candidacy were more likely to respond to 81 to 100% of the moderate risk sports within four minutes or less than those programs that are internship. The common perception of many athletic trainers regarding clinical education and the misuse of athletic training students is inconsistent with the current practices. Overall, athletic training students were seldom unsupervised for team practices and home events. In conclusion, the results of this study indicate that collegiate athletic trainers have adjusted well to the recent changes in clinical education requirements and to the medical health care coverage recommended guidelines. Future research should address athletic training student and athletic training program director responses relative to their head athletic trainers' responses. / School of Physical Education