Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2006. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 165-173).

Thesis (M.S. Ed.)--Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1992. / Includes bibliographical references (leaf 42). Also available via the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Michigan, 1987. / Bibliography: p. 206-209.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Oklahoma, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 75-79). Also available online (PDF file) by a subscription to the set or by purchasing the individual file.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Oklahoma, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 75-79)

abstract: This project presents an institutional history of women’s intercollegiate athletics at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. By looking to the individual campus, we learn about the ways in which administrators, coaches, faculty, and students understood the educational value of college sports. The UNC women’s program began in the 1950s as extramural play and quickly transformed into big-time college sports. By the early 1980s, the women experienced the same tension between academics and athletics at the heart of intercollegiate sports as the men. The National Collegiate Athletic Association, colleges, the media, and most Americans strongly associated the Big Time with the revenue-producing sports of football and men’s basketball. In Chapel Hill and across America, however, all sports teams, men’s and women’s, revenue and non-revenue, felt the effects of the increased professionalization and commercialization of the collegiate athletic enterprise. The history of women’s intercollegiate athletics provides a new window into exploring the benefits and challenges of big-time sports in higher education. Frances Burns Hogan, Director of Intercollegiate Athletics for Women, and her colleagues worked hard to expand sporting opportunities for women. They helped create the Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women, which provided governance and began hosting national championships in 1971. They collaborated with university administrators and athletic officials to implement Title IX compliance during the 1970s. Hogan and many directors eagerly joined men’s athletic conferences to commence regular season play, and by the 1980s, supported the move to the NCAA. Providing the best competitive experiences for Carolina female student-athletes motivated Hogan’s decisions. Frances Hogan and women’s directors nationwide determined the nature of women’s intercollegiate athletics. Hogan and her colleagues debated whether women’s sports should be inclusive and participatory or competitive and elitist. They struggled over the tension between the drive to expand women’s sporting opportunities and the desire to maintain educational priorities. They grappled with men in the athletic department who resisted their efforts to gain publicity, access to better facilities, adequate operational support, and the legitimacy enjoyed by men’s teams. By 1985, Hogan’s tireless efforts created the premier women’s athletic program in the Southeast. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation History 2015

Call number: LD2668 .T4 1966 R225 / Master of Science

The purpose of this study was to investigate the attitudes of college athletic department administrators (athletic directors, faculty representatives, football coaches, and basketball coaches) toward the athletic and academic achievement of student athletes and to compare administrators' perceptions with those of student athletes (NCAA, 1988). The review of literature discussed the history and development of the NCAA, college admission predictors, standardized tests, involvement of high schools in academic preparation of student athletes, and the NCAA legislation of Propositions 48 and 42. Additionally, programs which satisfy the needs and validate the credibility of student athletes and educational institutions are suggested. A questionnaire was designed to measure the attitudes of college athletic department administrators toward the academic and athletic accomplishments of student athletes. The results were then compared to a similar study completed by the NCAA (1988) on student athletes' attitudes toward these issues. The findings revealed significant group differences among athletic directors, faculty representatives, football coaches, and basketball coaches and significant comparative differences between the two studies. The data indicated that the responses of athletic directors and faculty representatives were often similar, as were those of football and basketball coaches. On questions that supported academics, athletic directors and faculty representatives were much more sympathetic than coaches. When the question promoted athletic concepts, coaches were more supportive than athletic directors or faculty representatives. When an issue involved both academics and athletics, the gap was reduced but athletic directors and faculty representatives showed stronger support than coaches. Comparison of the two studies confirmed strong opposition by athletes to questions on athletic eligibility. Student athletes were consistently negative on any issue threatening their eligibility, whereas athletic department administrators were generally supportive. When academic questions were addressed, student athletes were supportive though not as positive in their responses as athletic department administrators. Many of the responses and comparisons were anticipated and emulated recent research.

The problem of this study was to compare the existing role of college and university athletic trainers in Texas and bordering states with the role of college and university athletic trainers, (1) as recommended by national athletic training specialists and (2) as recommended by college and university athletic directors in Texas and bordering states.

Typescript, etc. / Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries