Sunday, November 29, 2015

Most student athletes struggle to balance school with athletics while planning for nonprofessional-sport careers

Louis Dubick plays lacrosse at the University of Maryland. He committed to UMD in his sophomore year of high school, but knew he would play the sport in college since his freshmen year at Winston Churchill High School.

google.com
Louis, currently a freshman, does not plan on playing professional lacrosse after graduating college and instead plans to get a job on Wall Street using his finance degree from the Robert H. Smith School of Business.

College students who are not athletes have one job at school: get good grades to get a good job. Athletes have two: get good grades to stay on the team and actually perform well on the team.

And when your sport is you job, grades start to become less of a priority. When grades start to become less of a priority, a good job after college becomes less obtainable.

Athletes are at a disadvantage when pursuing their academic goals due to time commitments.

When students have a commitment to also play a sport during college it takes away from time when regular students are participating in clubs, going to networking events, or having internships.

I was able to talk to Louis about his experience on the team, the challenges he faces as a student athlete, and how he addresses those challenges. When asked if he thinks student athletes are struggling to compete with non-athletes when it comes to getting jobs, Louis said it’s mainly the time commitment that is the issue.

“Because we put so much time into our sport, we don’t have time to build as great of a resume or join clubs as everyone else. We have to be really flexible. We can’t join clubs that we are interested in. This comes back to haunt us when getting a job because it only says “lacrosse” on the resume. The advantage goes to the non-athlete.”  

Coaches have high expectations of athletes that involve showing up to class and practice on time, doing well in school, and performing their best on the field or court.  

Since most athletes think they will go pro, they focus most of their time on their sport. The time commitment that comes with being a college athlete is huge. If not in class, the students are either practicing or doing team-related activities.

Dubick explains that the first couple weeks were the hardest because he wasn’t used to the schedule. Regular students are focused on getting acclimated to their class schedule and teachers’ styles, while student athletes are focused on that, plus their workout and practice schedules.

Louis describes a typical day he experiences as a lacrosse player in college as a day that involves a lot of physical training and team activities.


He says the hardest part of managing his time is knowing his own limits as far as rest and play. It can be physically challenging when most of your time is spent doing physical activities, and then when you have free time, you have to decide if you want to rest or gather the energy to go out with your friends. 

Louis says that it can be hard to manage all of the pressure when everyone expects you to do well. The main pressure comes from the coaches. They are the ones that manage you as a player and tell you what your role is as a student athlete.


Student athletes are struggling to compete with the regular student body, because it seems they have less time to participate in activities on campus that are non-sport related. However, if they take advantage of the resources provided to them as athletes and enjoy the experience of being on the field or court and in the classroom, they can go on to accomplish their realistic academic goals.

Even if athletes are not planning to play professionally, being on the team provides a unique college lifestyle that most students do not get to experience. “You have to love the game. Work hard because you love it,” Louis advises. 

Athletes pursue common and “easy” degrees to pass college and focus on sports.

Another reality check for college athletes: receiving a general degree does not always get you the job you want.

An article written by Kevin Trahan on SB Nation stresses how the NCAA is allowing athletes to receive “easy” degrees to fall back on in case the pro-sport-life does not work out.  Trahan explains that sometimes an “easy” degree is the only degree athletes can receive “either because that is all they can handle or because the coach tells them to.” 

Trahan believes that the NCAA’s perception of academic success for athletes is flawed. The NCAA is focused on athletes receiving degrees when really they should be focused on the education received necessary to get the jobs athletes want. Additionally, athletes are constantly placed into majors that do not always provide them with much success in the work force. They also seem to cluster into similar majors as their teammates.   
USA Today

USA Today expands on the topic of major clustering, explaining that the rules made in 2003 by the NCAA intended to improve graduation rates may have in reality caused the athletic departments to encourage athletes to take easy majors to satisfy the growing rates. 

Athletes who are passionate about their majors use extra resources provided to them on campus to compete with regular students and build on their efforts towards success after college.

Student athletes can access a lot of resources provided to them to help them achieve their academic goals. Dubick says UMD set him up with advisors, tutors, and tools that he uses to do well in school and later pursue a job out of college.

Louis explains the steps he is taking to gain work experience is by, “Going to see my college counselor, the career specialist on campus, as well as using the network back home and the network I made here to look for an internship this summer to build a resume to hopefully receive a job that I want out of college.” 

Freshmen lacrosse players are required to spend eight hours a week in the Xfinity Center for study hall. And, all athletes receive free tutors. 


 

As far as building a networking goes, Louis says playing a sport can actually help. “There are so many successful lacrosse players on Wall Street. All lacrosse schools are good so the competitive nature drives them towards Wall Street. The network the sport creates is amazing. The friends you make go far beyond the field. Since we don’t join fraternities, these are the guys you live with, play with, and hangout with. The only time you’re not with them is when you’re in class or studying.”   

He also says Maryland lacrosse has a networking app that lets you search UMD lacrosse alumni and gives exact pin locations on a map that shows where the graduates are in the U.S.  

There is a major percentage difference in athletes’ perception of going pro versus reality.

Louis is part of the group of student athletes who want to get an office job out of college and do not go pro. However the numbers are low for the percentage of student athletes who accept the reality of not going pro.

Jake New has an article on Inside Higher Ed that explores the difference between athletes’ perception of going pro versus reality. Gershon Tenenbaum, a sports psychology professor at Florida State University, explains that it is a “self-bias phenomenon” that shows why student athletes think they are 

New says the false perception is partly due to how colleges portray their athletic success. UCLA for example, describes themselves on their recruiting website described as “#1 in Olympic Gold Medals from 1984 to 2008" and “#1 in professional athletes.” 

Athletes may view this statement and think UCLA is their best way of making it professionally because so many other successful athletes went to the school.

New also explains that the confidence stems from how far successful college athletes have come already. They are used to continuously moving on to higher level leagues and being at the top of their programs.

Dan Lebowitz, the executive director of Northeastern University’s Center for the Study of Sport in Society, clarifies the problem, “By the time a basketball or football player gets to Division I or Division II, they’ve already been a star in their own town and community. They have been elevated to celebrity status at such a young age, before their frontal lobe has even fully developed. It creates a high confidence level, but also a delusion around what’s actually possible.”

And when athletes think of college sports as nothing more than auditions for professional leagues, Lebowitz said, they're less likely to focus on studying or earning a degree.

·
CITATIONS




http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/7/9/5885433/ncaa-trial-student-athletes-education

Sunday, November 8, 2015

Amerca's Trust In Media Has Reached An All Time Low


Sources: http://www.people-press.org/2009/09/13/press-accuracy-rating-hits-two-decade-low/
              http://www.gallup.com/poll/149624/majority-continue-distrust-media-perceive-bias.aspx


Friday, October 16, 2015

Online Daters’ Perception of Profiles Seem to be Created From the Basis of Trustworthiness, Interpersonal Attraction, and Personality

Today, there is an online dating service or app for almost any type of category. From general dating apps like Tinder, Zoosk, or Grindr to religious apps like JSwipe (“Jewish Tinder”) there are plenty of ways to find your match. Dating apps can be a very easy and quick way to match with people of interest without the hassle of striking up a conversation in public and trying to figure out if two people are compatible. Not only do dating apps open someone to more opportunities to meet new people, but also it can be done on their own time. Logging in whenever you want does not cut in to your normal schedule or take time away from dating in real life, but rather add another tool to find potential relationships. 

            A recent study called, ‘‘A Match Made.Online?’’ The Effects of User-Generated Online Dater Profile Types (Free-Spirited Versus Uptight) on Other Users’ Perception of Trustworthiness, Interpersonal Attraction, and Personality focused on two types of dating profiles and they are perceived by other daters. The two types of profiles examined were free-spirited and uptight. In this experiment, people were randomly assigned a type of profile and asked to explain their perception of the online dater. This study focused on gaining information about self-presentation and the presentation of others. Eventually, the two groups were differentiated based on long-term versus short-term relationship goals. The aim of the experiment was to provide essential information about online dating to online dating users, managers, and researchers. 
            The results proved that participants in the open conditions perceived the dater to be more ope  
n than those in the traditional conditions. The profiles seemed more open based on the photos, locations, and interests of the dater. Additionally, free-spirited people were perceived to be more actively seeking daters. On the other hand, daters in the uptight conditions were perceived more “trustworthy, interpersonally attractive, agreeable, conscientious, and neurotic.”
            Goffman introduced a theory knows as “self presentation” even before the use of Internet. This theory relates to people managing and manipulating their appearance and manner based on the interests of others, while at the same time the others are developing a perception of that person. This theory becomes more complicated in the world of online dating, because people can only create one profile at a time on each dating source. While Goffman proposed the self-presentation theory, Turkle further applies it to online dating. She explains how the online dating world leaves people with limitless opportunities to create multiple identities. Being able to try multiple identities in the online dating world poses a threat to relationships because eventually online relationships will lead to offline ones.             
Ellison explains how deception is always easy to control in online dating. Misrepresenting one’s height is a minimal error, but a huge misrepresentation of a profile, like one’s gender, defeats the purpose of online dating and weakens it transparency.  
Self-representation was the main focus of the study because that is all users have to interpret one’s profile. The idea of “selling yourself” is the main concept behind online dating. Interpersonal trust, “the reliance upon the communication of another person in order to achieve a desired but uncertain objective in a risky situation”, cannot be established without source credibility perception. 
An additional relevant theory is this study is the Interpersonal Deception Theory (IDT) which examines trustworthiness of profiles. Credibility of profiles is based on competence, composure, sociability, and dynamism. In this case, the free-spirited profiles seemed more open to many interests while the uptight profiles seemed more close-minded. Also, the open profiles were perceived to be interested in more profiles base don more profiles, while the uptight daters seemed more interested in only around 10 other daters. This information may lead users to view open/free- spirited daters as more strategic than traditional/uptight daters because they provided more alluring photos and more popular interests. Traditional/uptight daters might appear more credible because they present themselves as less interested in popularity by following less people. 
However, if daters based their perceptions  on sociability and dynamism open daters seemed more credible. This idea is based on IDT’s recognition of the “truth bias, a natural human tendency to assume others are telling the truth.” 
The results showed that participants in the open conditions perceived the target dater as more open in terms of profile photo, location, and interest than those in the traditional conditions. Also, those in the open conditions perceived the dater to be more “actively seeking daters” than those in the traditional conditions. And lastly, participants in the uptight conditions perceived the dater to be more trustworthy, interpersonally attractive, agreeable, conscientious, and neurotic than those in the free-spirited conditions.

            Overall, the main factor of how online daters perceived profiles was trust. However, it is a little contradictory because you never really know if what you are seeing is really true. It all depends on the daters feeling and perception towards the profile. Another study explains why online realtionships are more prone to breakups. Some of the factors includes, lack of information about  the person, and the idea that they were just someone you met online with less importance than someone you meet in person.

Sunday, September 6, 2015

Get a look at the newest smart watch. Introducing the Samsung Gear S2 Watch: onforb.es/1ECtGdP

This info is interesting because we now have another product from Samsung that we can compare to Apple and the already existing Apple Watch. Who will win this battle?