Student-athlete counselors are essential to the intercollegiate athletic experience for student-athletes, as academic athletic values have been found to be mutually reinforcing (Simon, 2008). Because of the mutually beneficial relationship that athletics and academics boast for many student-athletes, competent and effective counseling for student-athletes is essential to ensure the success of student-athletes, who have demanding schedules. The field of athletics counseling, which includes academic counseling, student-athlete support, life skills development, and psychological services, is characterized by a great deal of diversity both in the services offered and the staff members involved (Weight & Zullo, 2015).
As the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has increased its oversight with expanding bylaws and regulations, the importance of student-athlete counselors has also increased (Weight & Zullo, 2015). Factors including initial eligibility for first-year students, increased transfer rates, and the establishment of the Academic Progress Rate (APR) has led to an expanded financial commitment from universities, including lavish multi-million dollar facilities and full-time counselors, to student-athlete counseling across the NCAA and NAIA (Covell & Barr, 2010). These commitments will continue to grow as the number of student-athletes competing in intercollegiate athletics continues to grow each year.
As student-athlete counseling services continue to grow, so do the challenges facing counselors of student-athletes. This article will examine the demographic profile of student-athletes participating in intercollegiate athletics. After a demographic profile has been assessed, issues facing student-athlete counselors, including diversity issues, retention, stereotyping, and academic scandals, will be discussed. Lastly, strategies for navigating these issues will be presented.
Increasingly Diverse Student-Athlete Demographics
By definition, a student-athlete is a student who, as of the day of the varsity team’s first scheduled contest is listed as a team member, practices with the varsity team and receives coaching from one or more varsity coaches, or received athletically related student aid (NCAA, 2016). According to the NCAA Demographics Database, there were 183,755 student-athletes who participated in NCAA Division I sports in 2020 (NCAA, 2021). Of this number, 53% were male, versus just 47% females (NCAA, 2021). 102,678, or 56%, of student-athletes identified as white, with 21% identifying as black, 5% identifying as Hispanic or Latino, 7% identifying as nonresident alien, 2% identifying as Asian, with the rest identifying as two or more races, unknown, native Hawaiian or pacific islander, or American Indian or Native American (NCAA, 2021). Breaking it down even further, 27% of all student-athletes identified as white male, 14% black male, and 12% other male. White females accounted for 29% of all student-athletes, followed by 7% black female, and 12% other female (NCAA, 2021).
Studying historical trends of student-athlete demographics is encouraging, as the NCAA Division I sports have become increasingly diverse every year since 2012, which marks the beginning of the NCAA Demographics Database (NCAA, 2021). Back in 2012, white males and white females each accounted for 31%, respectively, of the total number of NCAA Division I student-athletes (NCAA, 2021). These numbers show that as additional athletic opportunities have been created, ethnic minorities have been given more opportunities to participate in intercollegiate athletics. Additionally, these numbers are supported by increased rates of gender and ethnic diversity among athletic administrators, head coaches, and assistant coaches, although the progress has been slower (NCAA, 2021).
Student-Athlete Retention
In July 2021, the National Student Clearinghouse published its annual Persistence and Retention Report, which examines first-year persistence and retention rates for beginning postsecondary students. Persistence rate is defined as the percentage of students who return to college at any institution for their second year, while retention rate represents the percentage of students who return to the same institution (NSC, 2021). According to the report, among full-time degree-seeking students, 73.1% returned in 2020 to the educational institution in which they were enrolled the year prior (NSC, 2021). Comparing student-athletes to the great student population, McElveen and Ibele found that student-athletes were more likely to return to school than their non-student counterparts (2019). The factors which assist with student-athlete retention are important to identify, as high retention rates are not just desirable from a competitive standpoint, but are also a contributing factor in determining an institution’s APR. A 2008 study found that receiving an athletic scholarship alone did not contribute to retention for first-year student athletes, but the combination of scholarship support and integration into the institution’s academic and social systems led to higher retention rates (Crom et al.). Additionally, females and individual sport student-athletes were retained at a higher rate than males and team sport student-athletes (Crom et al., 2008). These findings are significant, as being able to identify specific subgroups of student-athletes who are at a higher risk of withdrawing or transferring away from their original institution can contribute to fostering healthier learning environments and high APR scores and, thus, more successful student-athlete counseling.
In addition to boasting higher retention rates, student-athletes also graduate at a higher rate than their nonathlete counterparts. According to the NCAA, 90% of student-athletes graduated with a bachelor’s degree within six years of their initial enrollment in 2020 (NCAA, 2020). This is significantly higher than the graduation rate of the general student body, which was reported to be 69% for full-time students (NCAA, 2020). More specifically, ethnic minority student-athletes graduated 12 percentage points higher than their nonathlete counterparts (NCAA, 2020). Higher retention and graduation rates for student-athletes are a major factor for the continued development of intercollegiate athletics at NCAA member institutions.
Scandals Involving Student-Athlete Counselors
Academic scandals and misconduct have, unfortunately, plagued the NCAA since its inception. However, since the 1908s, the NCAA has adopted various academic policies in order to create healthier learning environments for student-athletes. As examined in the previous section of this paper, these policies have led to greater academic success. Despite these efforts, many institutions have been caught up in academic scandals involving counselors of student-athletes.
One of the most notable instances of scandal involving student-athlete counselors occurred at Florida State University (FSU) in the mid-2000s. University officials conducted an investigation which revealed that at least 61 student-athletes received inappropriate help from the FSU academic learning specialist, academic advisors, and tutors (Gayles & Faison, 2017). This group of student-athletes, which was comprised of student-athletes from ten different sports, received quiz and test answers, had papers written for them, and had papers edited, which are all violations of NCAA rules (Gayles & Faison, 2017). In response to these charges of academic misconduct, the programs associated with the misconduct at FSU were each placed on probation. Additionally, 46 FSU football players were suspended, and 12 wins were stripped from then-head coach Bobby Bowden’s record, which ultimately placed him second all-time in wins behind Penn State’s Joe Paterno (Gayles & Faison, 2017). Proper oversight and ethical training for the student-athlete counselors involved in this scandal could have helped FSU avoid its NCAA-mandated penalties, but more importantly, it could have created a better academic experience for the student-athletes at the institution.
Another notable example of student-athlete counselors being involved in an academic scandal occurred at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC). For almost 20 years, professors Julius Nyang’oro and Debbie Crowder utilized “paper classes” in order to help student-athletes, primarily football and men’s basketball players, maintain a GPA to retain their eligibility (Zimmer & Harper, 2017). Paper classes can be defined as any academic course at a higher institution that only requires a single essay at the end of the semester to demonstrate knowledge of a topic (Navarrete, 2019). Nyang’oro and Crowder assisted at least 3,100 by enrolling them in these courses in which they earned high grades for little to no effort (Zimmer & Harper, 2017). The scandal was revealed by a learning specialist at UNC, Mary Willingham, who worked with many student-athletes who she claimed read at an elementary grade-level (Zimmer & Harper, 2017). Despite a puzzling lack of NCAA-imposed penalties or probation, UNC has spent upwards of an estimated $8 million to date on fees stemming from law services (Zimmer & Harper, 2017), and four student-athlete counselors and faculty members were fired from the university (Navarrete, 2019). Perhaps the most damaging and disturbing aspect of this case of academic scandal was that the paper classes were part of the university’s African American Studies program, which was targeted by the UNC athletic department because of the program’s perceived lack of rigor (Zimmer & Harper, 2017). Over the years, it has been revealed that many at UNC, including administrators, counselors, and faculty, knew about the paper classes, but chose not to act. The lack of ethical conduct from the faculty members and counselors involved in the scandal led to much disgrace at UNC.
Strategies for Counselors and Advisors of Student-Athletes
Counselors of student-athletes face many unique challenges as they strive to assist their student-athletes succeed academically. Aside from facing the same challenges of a typical college student, such as more rigorous schoolwork, financial hardships, trouble navigating a new social sphere, and homesickness, student-athletes also have to manage the many responsibilities of participating in intercollegiate athletics, which include performance anxieties, practice and workout schedules, and combating stereotypes (Weight & Zullo, 2015). Having an empathetic and understanding counselor can be what makes all the difference in a student-athlete’s collegiate journey.
Simiyu suggested that institutions should strive to create a campus atmosphere that deliberately incorporates student-athletes into the institutional academic culture with a view of producing a graduate who would make a positive impact on society after matriculation (2010). As such, college administrators and faculty members should work to improve graduation rates among student-athletes at their respective institutions. A method to improve the academic standing of student-athletes is to directly address the student-athletes about their unique role on campus, and their potential impact on their respective institutions (Simiyu, 2010). For this method to succeed, student-athlete counselors should assist their student-athletes in nearly every step of their academic journeys, including registering for classes, attending classes, interacting with faculty, doing research, encouraging participation in group discussions, library usage, and encouraging participation in student activities such as co-curricular, government, and societies within an institution (Simiyu, 2010).
Conclusion
Student-athletes face many unique challenges that set them apart from their non-athlete counterparts. These challenges do not just create barriers between them and their non-athlete classmates, but they can also lead to student-athletes underperforming in the classroom. Counselors of student-athletes need to be sympathetic to the demands placed on their student-athletes, while simultaneously encouraging them to be proactive in their education and promoting participation in extracurricular activities. Because a significant number of student-athletes come from racially and ethnically diverse backgrounds, counselors of student-athletes need to also be aware of how to socialize the young minority student-athletes to invest in education with the same enthusiasm, work ethic, and creative expression that they display on the playing fields (Simiyu, 2010). Obviously, for these challenges to be sufficiently met, they would require multiple counselors in order to meet all of the student-athletes’ demands. Counselors including academic advisors, physical trainers, mental health experts, social and emotional experts, and, in some cases, spiritual advisors should all be utilized in order to create a holistic student-athlete support staff.
References
Covell, D., & Barr, S. (2010). Managing intercollegiate athletics. New York: Routledge.
Crom, C. L., Warren, B. J., Clark, H. T., Marolla, J., & Gerber, P. (2009). Factors Contributing To Student-Athlete Retention. Journal of Intercollegiate Athletics, 14-24.
Gayles, J. G., & Faison, C. (2017). Academic Misconduct at Florida State University. Scandals In College Sports, 90-95. doi:10.4324/9781315737225-10
Mcelveen, M., & Ibele, K. (2019). Retention and Academic Success of First-Year Student- Athletes and Intramural Sports Participants. Recreational Sports Journal, 43(1), 5-11. doi:10.1177/1558866119840466
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2016). 2015-16 NCAA Sports Sponsorship and Participation Rates Report. Retrieved August 29, 2021, from https://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4445-2015-16-ncaa-sports-sponsorship-and-participation-rates-report.aspx
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2020, November 17). DI college athletes reach 90% graduation rate. Retrieved August 29, 2021, from https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/di-college-athletes-reach-90-graduation-rate
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2021, March). NCAA Demographics Database. Retrieved August 29, 2021, from https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/research/ncaa-demographics-database
Navarrete, M. (2019, March 04). College athletes cut corners with paper classes. Retrieved August 29, 2021, from https://www.palomar.edu/telescope/2019/03/04/college-athletes-cut-corners-with-paper-classes/
Simiyu, N. W. (2010). Individual and institutional challenges facing student athletes on U.S. college campuses. Journal of Physical Education and Sports Management, 1(2), 16-24.
Weight, E. A., & Zullo, R. (2015). Administration of intercollegiate athletics. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Zimmer, T., & Harper, S. R. (2017). Fake “Paper Classes” at UNC Chapel Hill. Scandals In College Sports, 96-101. doi:10.4324/9781315737225-11
Hayden Coombs 