40
21 st Century Sport: Micro or Macro System?
| Date post: | 17-Jul-2015 |
| Category: |
Presentations & Public Speaking |
| Upload: | dean-culpepper |
| View: | 36 times |
| Download: | 1 times |
21st Century Sport: Micro or Macro
System?
Ecological Systems Theory
O Human Ecology Theory
O Human development is influenced by the
different types of environmental systems.
O Urie Bronfenbrenner in 1979
O Woodside, Caldwell, and Spurr (2006)
Microsystem
O The micro system's setting is the direct environment we have in our lives. Your family, friends, classmates, teachers, neighbors and other people who have a direct contact with you are included in your micro system. The micro system is the setting in which we have direct social interactions with these social agents.
O A sport team, such as football is a microsystem
Mesosytem
O The mesosytem involves the relationships
between the microsystems in one's life.
This means that your family experience
may be related to your school experience
O The coach of the football team my be the
dad of one of the players or the coach
may take on the role of an announcer or
pundit.
Macrosystem
O The macrosystem setting is the actual
culture of an individual. The cultural
contexts involve the socioeconomic status
of the person and/or his family, his
ethnicity or race and living in a still
developing or a third world country. It is
the overarching patterns of several
microsystems
O NCAA is the macrosystem of football in
college athlethics.
Sport
O The history of sport as a microsystem is
vast
O Webb, 1969
O Research showed that children move
through sport in the beginning as play
orientation to professional orientation
Consistent
O Structural Developmental Theorist
O Moral Context/Reasoning remains constant
across situations and different contents
O Colby & Kohlberg, 1987; Duda, 2008
Irregular Contexts/Microsystems
O Prison Dilemmas (Kohlberg, Hickey, &
Scharf, 1972)
O Sport
O Sportspersonship (Entzion, 1991)
O Game Reasoning (Carpendale & Krebs,
1992)
O Moral Functioning (Colby & Kohlberg,
1987)
O Moral Reasoning (Bredemeir & Shields,
1984)
“Set Aside”
O Theoretical Observation posits that play,
games, and sports are often seen by
participants and observers alike as set
aside or set apart.
O “Friendly game of racquetball or
basketball”
O Sports is governed by artificial rules and
roles with no meaning or value.
Moral Reasoning in Athlete Populations-20 Year Review by Stoll, S.K. & Beller, J.M.
(1997)
1. Athlete populations score significantly lower on moral
reasoning inventories than do non-athlete populations.
2. Male revenue producing sport athletes score significantly
lower than non- revenue producing sport athletes do.
3. Females score significantly higher than males, either
revenue
producing or non-revenue producing.
4. Females scores are dropping and we predict they will
converge with men's scores in 5 years.
5. Longitudinal studies of discrete competitive populations
drop
over a four-year period whether high school or college.
Moral Reasoning in Athlete Populations-20 Year Review by Stoll, S.K. & Beller, J.M. (1997)
6. Moral reasoning scores of non-intervened athletic
populations
are decreasing at significant rates.
7. The longer one is in athletics, the more affected is one’s
moral reasoning.
8. Intervention programs can have a positive effect on moral
reasoning.
9. Effective intervention programs have a long-term effect
on
moral reasoning.
10. Moral reasoning is one facet of a highly complex process
of
moral development.
Change in Sport
O Sport and the structure of sport have
taken on a new character with self-
perpetuating motivations and thus may no
longer be set apart (Tenenbaum, 2007)
O 24-Hour Sport Channels
O Fantasy Leagues
O Social Media
O Is it possible to leave sport now?
Research Questions
O Are certain individuals unable to leave the
culture of sport?
O Who are those individuals?
O Does sport function as a Macrosystem for
some individuals?
SurveyO Hahm-Beller Values Choice Inventory
(HBVCI)
The Hahm-Beller Values Choice Inventory is
designed to evaluate moral reasoning in the sport
milieu. Participants read twenty-one short common
sport scenarios and evaluate each situation based
on a five point Likert Scale from Strongly Agree to
Strongly Disagree. The HBVCI is the only inventory
specifically focused on sport and developed using
moral theory as a guide.
O Question 1: Male soccer players are allowed to play the ball with any part of their body except the hands or outstretched arms. A soccer player receives a chest high pass and taps the ball to the ground with his hand. The referee does not see this action and the play continues, Because it is the referee's job to see these actions, the player is not obligated to report his foul. SA A N D SD
O Based on deontological theory, this scenario deals with a direct action by the participant or moral agent. In this case, the moral agent acted and then passed his obligation of honesty to an authority and then lied by omission about the act. A deontic would say that he is being dishonest in his act of omission and irresponsible by passing his responsibility to another. A true deontic, therefore, would tell the referee that he touched the ball with the hand and accept the consequences. As scored on the HBVCI, a deontic would mark this question SD (strongly disagree).
HBVCI
O Relibility
O The HBVCI has a high reliability and
validity, with Chronbach Alphas from .74 to
.88 (HBVCI Manual, 2010)
HBVCI-ValidityO The inventory has been read and evaluated by several notable sport
and general ethicists who agreed that the inventory, in their
interpretations, does measure deontological reasoning (Smith, 1990).
O During the HBVCI test development stages, the DIT was used as a
measure of concurrent validity. The DIT itself is known as a valid and
reliable measurement instrument. The original American DIT test-
retest reliability analysis conducted by Rest (1979) was 0.82. In
addition, DIT internal consistency checks were 0.77 for Rest (1979)
and 0.66 for Dickensian (1979). Furthermore, the Chronbach's Alpha
Index, found by calculating each story's stage scores across the six
categories, is found in the high 0.70s.
O Hahm's (1989) study, found total deontological scores on the HBVCI
reflected similar scores with the DIT's "P" values. In particular, male
student athlete scores (60.51) also reflected a low DIT "P" mean
value (28.74). In 1990, Beller found a correlation between the HBVCI
total deontic reasoning scores and the DIT "P Index" of 0.82.
1994 Norms
_________________________________
9th 66.63
10th 67.83
11th 69.23
12th 69.27
University 70.85Hahm, C.H., Beller, J.M., & Stoll, S.K. (1989, 1994). The Hahm-Beller Values Choice
Inventory. Copyrighted, Available from Center for ETHICS*: Room 500 Memorial Gym,
University of Idaho, Moscow, ID
Defining Issues Test-2
1. Reliability–Cronbach’s alpha is in the
upper .70s / low .80s. Test-retest reliability
is about the same.
O Validity for the DIT has been assessed in
terms of seven criteria cited in over 400
published articles (Rest, Narvaez,
Bebeau, & Thoma, 1999; Thoma, 2002;
Thoma, 2006)
DIT-2
O DIT-2 consists of five dilemmas:O (1) a father contemplates stealing food for his starving
family from the warehouse of a rich man hoarding food;
O (2) a newspaper reporter must decide whether to report a damaging story about a political candidate;
O (3) a school board chair must decide whether to hold a contentious and dangerous open meeting;
O (4) a doctor must decide whether to give an overdose of pain-killer to a suffering but frail patient;
O (5) college students demonstrate against U.S. foreign policy.
Methods
O Surveyed over 500 college students in general education courses.
O Research Institution in West Texas
O Regional Division II in South Texas
O Private Division NAIA in West Texas
O Demographics
O HBVCI
O DIT-2
O Qualitative Follow-up Interviews
Subjects
O 315 surveys were analyzed
O 174 females
O 63 athletes*
O Three Groups
O Sport Science
O Athletes
O Other majors
Descriptive Data
O Mean age was 20.1, SD 1.8
O 41% Freshman, 129
O 34% Sophomore, 107
O 9% Junior, 28
O 16% Senior or higher, 51
HBVCI
O Sport Science 45.13, 9.65
O Athletes 46.32, 11.33
O Other 65.33, 7.56
1994 Norms
_________________________________
9th 66.63
10th 67.83
11th 69.23
12th 69.27
University 70.85Hahm, C.H., Beller, J.M., & Stoll, S.K. (1989, 1994). The Hahm-Beller Values Choice
Inventory. Copyrighted, Available from Center for ETHICS*: Room 500 Memorial Gym,
University of Idaho, Moscow, ID
Sample mean for DIT-2
Sport Science Mean 19.84 SD 12.36
Athletes Mean 19.98 SD 15.33
Other Mean 31.12 SD 13.22
Results
O Internal Reliability of DIT-2 .81
O Internal Reliability of HBVCI .84
O Overall mean DIT-2 24.26*
O Sport Science/Athletes-HBVCI
O Scored the lowest; mean 45.73
O Scores in the mid 50s and low 60s reflect reasoning perspectives that a typical junior high school student would reason from: What’s in it for me; What it takes now to win; What someone tells me is right; little of no concern for others. Scores in the high 60s and above reflect reasoning that takes into account social order principles.
Results
O DIT-2Sport Science Mean 19.84 SD 12.36
Athletes Mean 19.98 SD 15.33
Other Mean 31.12 SD 13.22
O Sport Science and Athletes
O Personal Interest (Stage 2/3)- Mean 35.44,
SD 12.48
O Other
O Post Conventional Stage-Mean 32.10, SD
13.12
What does this mean?
O The Personal Interests Schema is regarded as the least developmentally advanced level of moral reasoning. In operating primarily at the Personal Interests level, the respondent takes into consideration what the protagonist of the story, or those close to the protagonist, has to gain or lose.
O The Postconventional Schema is regarded as the most developmentally advanced. At the Postconventional reasoning level, laws are not simply blindly accepted (as with the Maintaining Norms Schema), but are scrutinized in order to ensure society-wide benefit. So, a respondent who is primarily using this schema will focus on what is best for society as a whole.
Results
O Controlled for Athletic status and previous athletic performance.
O A MANOVA (Wilks’ Lambda=.430, p<.005) was conducted with Scheffé post hoc tests to determine differences.
O Athletes and Sport Science Majors (p<.001) were significantly different.
O Sport Science majors scored equivalently to athletes in terms of lower moral reasoning scores.
O No differences between males and females.
Results
O Qualitative Interview
O Three themes emerged
O Sport Science majors spent similar amounts
of time thinking, watching, reading,
exercising, and discussing sport compared to
athletes.
O Athletes never left their sport.
O Year round training, practice, films, nutrition,
clothing
O Identifying with sport was important for both
the athletes and SS majors.
Conclusion
O These findings may suggest that those
involved in sport (whether participating or
studying) are operating in a milieu
differently from those who are not. They
are functioning in an all-pervasive
structure or meaning-making system has
shaped how they reason morally.
Conclusion
O The Sport Macrosystem
O The laws of the Macrosystem determine culture and beliefs.
O These beliefs may manifest themselves in illegal gains, strategy, and actions all perceived to be legal.
O Treatment of athletic injuries, response to player actions, and the attitudes of players, coaches, and individuals where Sport is a Macrosystem.
Conclusion
O The Sport Macrosystems
O We have not adequately examined the entire picture of the current competitive model and suffer a blindness to the hard, real facts.
O Administrators of any athletic program should be governed by the premise that rules, justice, and obligation should “…be a critical friend that does not get in the way of good judgment.” Empathy, respect, for others, and honor should be the foundation.
What We Added
O This research identified a specific and
similar group that is scoring at a reduced
moral reasoning level.
O The Sport Culture is no longer Set Apart
Real-World Scenarios
Moral Context/Reasoning remains
constant across situations and different
contents--NO
O Deflagate
O “If I don’t get caught, it isn’t wrong”
O The end outcome is what is important
O The 24-Hour commentary on these beliefs
O They never leave it
