Journal of Recreation and Leisure

Welcome to the 2005 Home Page of The Journal of Recreation and Leisure (JRL) sponsored by Interdisciplinary Scholars within the Southwest District of the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance. The JRL became an annual publication beginning with the September, 2004 electronic edition. The JRL was available in the traditional paper format until the 1997 edition of the Journal of Recreation and Leisure. Skyrocketing publishing and distribution costs prohibited future publications of the JRL in the traditional manner. With support from the Department of Recreation Management and Youth Leadership at Brigham Young University, this electronic format for the JRL was piloted. Begining with September 2004, the JRL became an annual publication entitled The Journal of Recreation and Leisure (JRL). The September 2005 publication features eight professional articles approved by the JRL editorial boards. Four are carried over from 2004 and four are new. Readers are able to electronically locate and download the information needed within new format of The Journal of Recreation and Leisure.

Future, editorial decisions for each publication will be made by the 2005 Editorial Board. Dr. David L. Holmes is the Editor-In-Charge. Additionally, the Editorial Board makes decisions about sequencing the submitted articles within this electronic journal. The articles are presented in the same order that they were accepted for publication. Thus, The Journal of Recreation and Leisure will be an on-going effort to communicate important 21st Century issues within Recreation and Leisure to (you) the readers.

The Journal of Recreation and Leisure (JRL) editorial protocol has been successful. Continue to send questions or comments to: Dr. Holmes, Ph.D. at The University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Dr. Holmes is located in the Harrah College of Hotel Administration within the Department of Tourism and Convention Administration. The official mailing address for the JRL is 4505 Maryland Parkway, Las Vegas, Nevada 89154-3035. FAX # (702) 895-4870 E-Mail: dholmes@ccmail.nevada.edu

If you wish to submit an article please send one hard copy, an electronic copy in Microsoft Word, an abstract, of 250 words or less. It is also requested that the complete names of the authors, as well as addresses, affiliations and home/work telephone numbers be included. Submissions need to be mailed to Dr. David Holmes at the address above.

A Report of the Surgeon General (1996) is causing fundamental changes in what Americans know about physical activity and health. It is changing the way that local parks and recreation programs within American communities are being organized. A new view of physical activity is based upon three important findings from the Surgeon GeneralÕs report: (1) People who are usually inactive can improve their health and well-being by moderate physical activity on a regular basis. (2) Physical activity need not be strenuous to achieve these health effects. (3) Greater health benefits can be achieved by increasing the amount (duration, frequency, or intensity) of physical activity. Benefits of Regular Physical Activity The Surgeon General report (1996) validates the reduction of risk from some of the leading causes of illness and death within the United States. Regular physical activity improves health in the following ways:

• · Reduces the risk of dying prematurely
• · Reduces the risk of dying from heart disease
• · Reduces the risk of developing high blood pressure
• · Helps reduce blood pressure in people who already have high blood pressure
• · Reduces the risk of developing colon cancer
• · Reduces feelings of depression and anxiety
• · Helps control weight
• · Helps build and maintain healthy bones, muscles and joints
• · Helps older adults become stronger and better able to move about without falling
• · Promotes psychological well-being

Achieving A Moderate Amount of Physical Activity A moderate amount of physical activity can be achieved in a variety of ways. Americans can select activities that they enjoy and that fit into their daily lives. Because the amount of activity is a function of duration, intensity and frequency; the same amount of activity can be obtained in longer sessions of moderately intense activities (such as walking) as in shorter sessions of more strenuous activities (such as running).

New Health Promotion Strategies in America New health promotion and disease prevention strategies can be enhanced within local parks and recreation programs within American communities. 21st Century changes in health and health care have created a fundamental debate about the nature of disease as well as quality of care issues. One recent authoritative study in the United States concludes that more than 70 percent of current morbidity and mortality rates are preventable (Nesse & Williams, 1994). In economic terms, health care consumes approximately 14% of the United States economy. If 70 percent of the morbidity and mortality costs are preventable, then it is possible to change about 10% of the United States economy. The economic and healthy lifestyle circumstances of 21st Century American will change the patterns of individual behavior and influence the nature of future municipal leisure services in the United States.

Debate About Local Parks and Leisure Services There is a fundamental debate about the nature of public recreation services based upon the emerging health benefits of physical activity. Research indicates that approximately four out of five residents of the United States and Canada use local parks and leisure services (Godbey, Graefe & James, 1992; Harper, Neider, Godbey & Lamont, 1996). Among the elderly, studies indicate that a vast majority of those within the 50 years and older cohort use local leisure services. In fact, those most likely to use local leisure services ÒfrequentlyÓ are between the ages of 66 and 75. Additionally, this older group of participants cite Òhealth benefitsÓ as the prime reason for their participation in leisure services. Godbey (1992, 1996) identified frequent references to the health benefits of Òa chance for exerciseÓ and Òstress reductionÓ among older adults. There is some precedent of health research guidelines targeting specific leisure services that have measurable wellness outcomes. The Healthy People 2000 statement of national opportunities from the United States Department of Health and Human Services identifies ÒÕincreases in community availability and accessibility of physical activityÓ sponsored by public leisure services. These venues for leisure service activity are similar to those used by the Huntsman World Senior Games (St. George, Utah). They include the following: hiking, biking and fitness trails, public swimming pools and acres of open space facilities (Healthy People 2000, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services).

Leisure Services Based Upon A Wellness Model Leisure services in the 21st Century will be using a wellness model that combines the concerns of health with the service delivery issues of leisure activities. Changes in health policy and health care organizations will seek to extend healthy lives and establish health benefit-based research. At the same time, public leisure services are beginning to utilize the concept of benefits-based research to demonstrate that programs and services contribute to the health of both individuals and communities. Health benefits-based research documenting a relationship between active lifestyles and physical well-being has long been recognized in the literature. Physical activity has also been demonstrated to have positive consequences for a number of psychological dimensions. Gleser and Mendelberg (1990) identified physical activity as an effective treatment for moderate depression and for enhancing self-esteem. More recently, Covey and Felts (1991) reported that physically active adolescent women had better coping characteristics and a more positive self image than a sedentary comparison group. Stimpson, Heiner, and Gray (1993) found that active people, regardless of age or gender, have higher self-esteem than sedentary people. Stimpson, Heiner and Gray (1993) reported that physical activity is an even more important accompaniment of high self-esteem for senior adults than it is for young people. Finally, Evans and Rosenberg researched 10 biomarkers of human vitality that you can alter are: (1) Muscle Mass; (2) Strength; (3) Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR); (4) Body Fat Percentage; (5) Aerobic Capacity; (6) BodyÕs Blood-Sugar Tolerance; (7) Cholesterol/HDL Ratio; (8) Blood Pressure; (9) Bone Density; and (10) BodyÕs Ability to Regulate its Internal Temperature.

Huntsman World Senior Games: A Case Study of Benefits Given the trend toward a wellness model with health benefits-based research and the 21st Century role of leisure services in promoting health for older adults, the Huntsman World Senior Games research team sponsored a study to determine how leisure services activity relates to health benefits of cognitive functioning among senior athletes. A total of 220 volunteers qualified for inclusion in the health benefits-based research study by virtue of their having at least three hours of active physical involvement per week on a regular basis and being 50 to 90 years of age. There were 142 males and 78 females with 8 to 21 years of formal education. Public venues for leisure services were utilized for activities of basketball, bowling, bridge, cycling, golf, horsehoes, mountain biking, racquetball, road races, soccer, softball, swimming, table tennis, track & field, triathlon, and volleyball. Participants in these events provided information about activity-based health benefits on a variety of physiological and psychological assessments. The physiological assessments included: bone density, glaucoma screening, blood pressure, mammography, and colon cancer screening. Self-report psychological assessment included lifestyle indicators such as amount, frequency, and kinds of physical activity; consumption data on alcohol, tobacco and medications; and the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (MMMSE, Teng and Chui, 1987). The MMMSE is an often used questionnaire for assessing cognitive impairment and dementia. The physiological and psychological assessments were administered by an interdisciplinary research team of nursing, leisure services, and gerontology faculty and students, who were trained in the appropriate procedures associated with each assessment. The research procedures were piloted during previous Huntsman World Senior Games events (1993-1997). Each phase of pilot research provided important critiques and modifications of the assessment process. An additional questionnaire representing almost 200 participants in the 1997 Huntsman World Senior Games (HWSG) provided self-report information about their involvement with the games. HWSG senior athletes wrote about overcoming major physical handicaps to participate. Some wrote about benefits of friendships developed during the games. Other HWSG participants wrote about medical screenings that saved their lives and caught potentially dangerous medical problems early enough to be treated on a timely basis. This self-report information augmented the health benefits-based assessments that were physiological and psychological in nature.

Physical Activity Benefits For Senior Athletes In order to make comparisons of the data from this physically active sample with some normative data from a large epidemiological study of dementia completed by Tombaugh, McDowell, Kristjansson, and Hubley (1996), subjects were divided into eight age ranges (50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, 70-74, 75-79, 80-84, and 85-90). They were also sorted into three groups according to years of education (0-8, 9-12, and 12 or more). Additionally, they were sorted into groups of gender. These data are summarized in Table 1, which shows the MMMSE mean scores by age group, years of education, and gender as reported by Tombaugh, et al (1996) for the normative group, and the parallel scores obtained from physically active participants in the present study. The Huntsman World Senior Games Athletes evidenced an advantage in cognitive functioning over the Tombaugh, et al (1996) Normative Sample for all ages samples, for each Education Level and for both Genders. This advantage is best understood to be a consequence of a physically active life-style. Even though the amount of physical activity required in this study for classification as a Senior Athlete (at least one hour, three times per week) is not excessive, the health benefit-based assessment in terms of cognitive functioning is substantial. In fact, it appears to be the case that dementia that has been thought to be a natural accompaniment of aging, is not evident among those who are physically active. For this group of senior athletes, none of the other independent variables (gender, age, and years of education) identified by Tombaugh, McDowell, Kristjansson, and Hubley (1996) are determinants of cognitive functioning. In this study, physical activity is the only important variable that influences cognitive functioning that often declines with advanced aging. Physical activity seems to improve cognitive functioning in addition to the self-reported health benefits of chance for exercise and stress reduction among older adults (Godbey, 1992).

International Special Olympics: A Case Study of Benefits The purpose of the Dykens and Cohen (1996) research team was to evaluate the effect of physical activity events on social and emotional goals within Special Olympics International, specifically whether Special Olympics facilitates social competence and self-esteem in persons with mental retardation. Findings were ÒtriangulatedÓ across three studies on social competence, adaptation and self-perceptions of 104 athletes from the 1993 Team USA (mean age = 22 years; mean IQ = 59). Study 1 related behavior to athletesÕ length of time in Special Olympics. Study 2 compared Team USA to an appropriately matched group of non-Special Olympians. Study 3 assessed Team USA before and 4 months after their participation in the World Games held in Salzburg, Austria. Results were published in the Journal of American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry (1996), 35(2):223-220. Length of time participating in Special Olympics was the most powerful predictor of social competence among the study groups. Special Olympics athletes had higher social competence scores and more positive self-perceptions than the comparison groups. Team USAÕs behavioral data remained stable over time, suggesting that high pre-game scores were not simply a function of parental or athlete pre-game excitement. Also, Special Olympics utilizes The Motor Activities Training Program (MATP) to introduce persons with disabilities to age and functionally appropriate motor and sport activities: i.e. mobility (gymnastics); dexterity (athletics); striking (softball); kicking (soccer); Manual or electric wheelchair (athletics); swimming (aquatics), etc.

The Benefits of Physical Activity in America 21st Century research findings about health benefits are changing the way that local parks and recreation programs within American communities are being organized. The Surgeon General Report and Case Studies about Huntsman World Senior Games and Special Olympics International offer three promising suggestions for people to include more physical activity into their daily lives. First, no one is too old to enjoy the benefits of regular physical activity. Muscle-strengthening activities and exercises can reduce the risk of falling and fracturing bones and can improve the ability to live independently. Secondly, parents can help their children maintain a physically active lifestyle by providing encouragement and opportunities for physical activity. Family events and traditions should promote opportunities for everyone in the family to be active participants. Finally, regular physical activity can help people with disabling conditions to improve their stamina, muscle strength, and psychological well-being. Physical activity promotes increasing abilities to perform activities of daily living and enhance the quality of life. Public Law 94-142 and American with Disabilities Act (ADA) legislation provide helpful guidelines to revise and require individualized physical activity programs and accessible activity areas and facilities for persons with disabilities. The References

• AARP Andrus Foundation www.andrus.org
• Covey, L.A. and Feltz, D.L. (1991) Physical Activity and Adolescent Female Psychological Development. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 20 (4) 183-196.
• Driver, B.L., Brown, P. and Peterson, G (1991) The Benefits of Leisure. State College: Venture Publishing.
• Gleser, J. and Medelberg, H. (1990) Exercise and Sport in Mental Health: A Review of the Literature, Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences, 27 (2), 99-112.
• Godbey, G., Graefe, A. and James, S. (1992) The Benefits of Local Recreation and Park Services: A Nationwide Study of the Perceptions of the American Public. Ashburn, VA:NRPA.
• Harper, J., Neider, D., Godbey, G. and Lamont, D. (1996) the Use and Benefits of Local Government Recreation and Park Services in Edmonton, Alberta. Winnipeg: Health, Leisure and Human Performance Institute, University of Manitoba.
• Healthy People 2000 Statement (1990) U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. Washington, D.C.:Federal Document
• Huntsman World Senior Games (HWSG) (1997) Tell Your Story. St George:Huntsman World Senior Games Publication
• National Institute of Aging www.nih.gov/nia
• Nesse, R. and Williams, G. (1996) Why we get Sick- The New Science of Darwinian Medicine. New York: Vintage Books.
• Payne, L., Orsega-Smith, B., Godbey, G. and Roy, M (1998) Local Parks and Health of Older Adults: Results of an Exploratory Study, Parks and Recreation. Ashburn,VA:NRPA
• Stimpson, D.V., Heiner, S.W. and Gray, H.R. (1993) Self-Esteem as a Function of Exercise, Age, and Gender. The Journal of Recreation and Leisure. 13 (1) 36-42.
• Tombaugh, T.M., McDowell, I. Kristjansson, B. and Hubley, A.M. (1996) Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE and the Modified-MMSE (MMMS): A Psychometric Comparison and Normative Data Psychological Assessment 8 (1), 48-59.

Researchers examining youth sport motivation have tended to emphasize constructs such as perceived physical ability and task and ego goal orientation as a means for understanding young peopleÕs motivation (Gill et al., 1983). Allen (2003) examined the contribution that social motivational orientations and perceptions of belonging make toward understanding youth sport motivation. Just as children have different agendas for school, evidenced by research on participation motivation, sources of affect demonstrate that youth sport participants have concerns other than physical competence. That is, individualsÕ motivation in sport may not always be related to or explained by a desire to demonstrate or develop physical ability. Rather, social concerns such as developing and demonstrating social connections may also be important to understanding young peopleÕs sport motivation (Allen, 2003). Our study will provide insights on the participation and motivation of young, elite competitors in sport and physical activity. Additional insights will be provided relative to moral and ethical development of youth athletes within the context of youth sport. We will be replicating and extending work found in the literature focusing on the basic motives for sport involvement found in Gill et al.Õs (1983) research and will include exploratory research on parents and their motives for their childÕs sport participation. We will be extending existing research by including the dynamics surrounding ethical and moral development. In addition, we will be extending research further by examining the dynamics of recreational athletic involvement versus elite youth involvement. This is a gap in the knowledge base that needs to be filled from both the perspective of the participants and the parents. An ANOVA one-way factor analysis will be completed to determine the differences in the athletesÕ and parentsÕ of recreational and elite programs and their motives and reasons for participating in sport as well as the moral and ethical lessons derived from sport.

Sport Motivation

A social view of motivation is not new to motivation research; however, it has received less empirical attention than other aspects of motivation such as competence or achievement motivation (Allen, 2003). Allen stated that: The potential that the desire for social connections with significant others has as a central energizer of behavior in social contexts is only now being recognized. As a consequence of the need to belong, individuals should show tendencies to seek out interpersonal contacts and cultivative relationships. Their thoughts should reflect a pervasive concern with forming and maintaining relationships. Further, they should experience positive affect from forming and solidifying social bonds and negative affect when relationships are broken, threatened, or refused. (p. 552)

Klint and Weiss (1987) found that gymnasts with higher perceptions of social competence rated friends and team atmosphere as more important motives for participation. Ewing (1981) and Whitehead (1995) both described a social-approval, goal orientation and demonstrated a relationship with participation motivation. Lewthwaite and Piparo (1993) described the relative importance of social acceptance and positive social experience orientations to the sport experience of gymnasts. Examining the athletic experiences of high school athletes, Schilling and Hayashi (2001) found that they defined positive and negative experiences through socially oriented perspectives such as contributing to the team, social support and approval, pleasing others, and affiliation. With regard to social goal orientations, researchers have used a variety of terms and definitions. And it appears as if there are at least two general types of social goal orientations that have been reported. One type of social goal orientation that has emerged emphasizes affiliation experiences and positive affect at school (Anderman, 1999; Ryan, Hicks, & Midgley, 1997). The focus of this orientation is on the development and maintenance of mutually satisfying relationships. Relationship goals (Anderman, 1999; Anderman & Anderman, 1999; Ryan et al., 1997) and positive social experience (Lewthwaite & Piparo, 1993) are examples of this affiliation orientation. Such individuals are oriented toward engaging in sport for the opportunity to socialize, develop, and maintain relationships with other like-minded individuals. They are likely to feel good about their involvement in sport when it provides opportunities for social activities and for personal relationships (Allen, 2003). The second social goal orientation emphasizes social validation of oneself through recognition from others and social standing. Goal orientations such as social approval (Ewing, 1981; Whitehead, 1995), social acceptance (Lewthwaite & Piparo, 1993), and social status (Anderman, 1999; Anderman & Anderman, 1999; Ryan et al., 1997) are examples of this social validation orientation. Allen (2003) suggested that: Such individuals are oriented toward the potential gains provided by sport involvement such as social status, approval from significant others, and social recognition. The meaning of sport participation lies in what it can do for their social relations and what it says about them as individuals. They are likely to feel good about their involvement in sport only when they are part of the popular group or feel they have gained the approval of others (p. 554).

In addition to social goal orientations, researchers have demonstrated relationships between perceptions of school belonging and studentsÕ thoughts and actions at school. Students who reported a greater sense of belonging were less likely to be absent or tardy and more likely to hold higher expectations of school success. Roeser, Midgley, & Urdan (1996) found that 8th grade students with higher perceived belonging reported a greater sense of academic self-efficacy and positive affect toward school. Similarly, Anderman (1999) also found that 5th and 6th graders reporting higher school belonging had greater positive affect and lower negative affect toward school. Whether similar relationships exist in the sport context and the contribution that perceptions of belonging have as part of a social view of motivation for sport has yet to be explored (Allen, 2003). Despite recognition of social opportunities in sport, researchers have largely ignored the contribution that social goal orientations and perceptions of belonging may make toward providing a more complete picture of young peopleÕs motives for participating in sport. One reason for this may be due to the lack of a clear conceptualization and measurement of social goal orientations and perceptions of belonging. Thus, Allen (2003) examined the contribution that social goal orientations and perceptions of belonging make toward understanding female adolescentsÕ sport motivation. Our study will fill in a much-needed gap in the literature in that it will examine and help to provide an understanding of female adolescentsÕ sport participation motives, particularly within the elite club environment. In addition, the investigation will provide insights into moral and ethical development using different levels within the hierarchal structure of youth sport including age and elite versus recreational sport experiences. Allen (2003) hypothesized that female adolescents would endorse social goal orientations for sport, specifically affiliation and social validation. Secondly, that social goal orientations and perceptions of belonging would add to a physical-ability-related explanation of adolescentsÕ interest in sport. Participants included students from an all-girls high school and ranged from 14 to 17 years of age. A social motivational orientations scale for sport (SMOSS) was generated reflecting two social motivational orientations: affiliation, describing a focus on developing reciprocal relationships and positive social experiences, and social validation, focusing on recognition from others and social status. Drawing their attention to the wider social connections in sport was believed to be important because it meant the measure was applicable to all sport participants, not just those involved in team sports. Secondly, it enabled assessment of a general view of sport belonging, rather than just assessing a sense of team membership. A task and ego orientation in sport questionnaire (TESOSQ) consisted of 7 items focusing on success defined through task mastery, learning, and effort, and reflected success defined by outperforming others and demonstrating superior ability. ParticipantsÕ perception of their physical ability was assessed by rating their sports ability in general, compared to all other players they know in their sport, how their teacher or coach would rate their ability, and how friends would rate their sports ability. Lastly, the extent to which adolescents genuinely engaged in and enjoyed activities during their sport involvement were assessed (Allen, 2003). Results show that these adolescents felt their sport participation had gone well when they felt affiliated with a group, mastered tasks, received recognition from others for their accomplishments, were popular, and when they outperformed others. The results also revealed that the athletes felt they belonged in sport, had a moderate level of physical ability, and were moderately interested in sport participation. With regard to the relationships among the motivation variables and sport interest and enjoyment, affiliation orientation; task orientation; perceived belonging; and perceived physical ability were all associated with greater interest and enjoyment of sport. However, the social status orientation demonstrated a weaker relationship and social recognition and ego orientations were not significantly related to interest and enjoyment. One possibility is that in order to feel they belong in sport, participants feel they need at least a moderate amount of physical ability. Researchers examining peer acceptance and friendships in sport have provided evidence to suggest that being physically competent, particularly for boys, leads to greater acceptance, social status, and popularity. It could be argued, therefore, that perceptions of physical competence lead to perceptions of belonging in sport. That is, in order to belong in sport, it helps to be good at sport (Allen, 2003). There has been little research, however, on the potential implications that these social opportunities have for explaining youth sport motivation. The purpose of AllenÕs (2003) study was to examine a social view of motivation, specifically the contribution of social goal orientations and perceptions of belonging toward understanding female adolescentsÕ interest and enjoyment in sport. The results indicated that female adolescents do endorse social goal orientations for sport, and that social motivation constructs provide an additional explanation of their interest and enjoyment in sport. Future research might examine the role of perceived belonging in the social motivation process; explore the stability of social motivation orientations and the influence of situational factors on social motivation; and what behaviors of significant others facilitate perceptions of belonging and lead to different goal states. Not only will the examination of the influence of situational factors on social motivation further our understanding of social motivation and its consequences, this research will also have implications for practitioners with regard to fostering positive sport experiences for young people (Allen, 2003).

Self-Esteem Development.

ÒOne of the prime concerns of most agencies in the recreation sector is the amount of competition in their sports programs and its impact on the adolescent, especially in self-esteem developmentÓ (Groves & Hines, 1989, pp. 861). Groves and Hines (1989) suggest that self-esteem is a personal judgment of ÒworthinessÓ and is expressed in the attitudes the individual holds about him/herself. Positive self-esteem is a precursor to positive growth and development and children who doubt their ability become their own worst enemies. Gill et al. (1983) conducted a study in the areas of participation and motivation. Responses indicated that the most important reasons for participating were to improve skills, have fun, learn new skills, and maintain physical fitness. Stress reduction also has been identified as an important reason for participation as has achievement, with boys being more achievement oriented than are girls (Sapp & Haubenstricker, 1978). Researchers agree that positive self-concept is vital to the development and adjustment of todayÕs youngsters and those who have more successful experiences are significantly higher in their self-evaluation than those with less successful experiences. Two important components of competition are the persistence/desire to win and the win-loss record of oneÕs team. Win-loss record is an important factor in the formation of self-concept; players who lose consistently believe they are lower in ability and that luck is an important factor in winning. The important elements of self-esteem are the individualÕs assessment of self-worth and his/her performance. There are three mediating factors between competition and self-esteem: sex, reason for participation, and coachÕs assessment of ability. Groves & HineÕs (1989) study examined the relationship between competition, with its associated factors, and the development of self-esteem. The idea of winning was the ideological bridge, if you will, that provided the impetus to include moral and ethical development in the study. The dynamic surrounding recreational versus elite program involvement is another dynamic that needs to be explored given that it could have an empirical effect on relationship between winning and in turn moral decisions in competitions. Groves & HineÕs (1989) study included 201 participants in a recreational basketball league. There were no significant relationships established between win/loss record and sex with self-esteem and its associated factors: self-degradation, family/parents, leadership/popularity, anxiety/assertiveness, and basketball. Significant inverse relationships, however, were identified between will to win and the components of family/parents and basketball self-esteem. Those with higher will to win scores had higher self-esteem scores related to family/parents and basketball. Family/parents may be putting pressure upon youngsters to perform in a competitive situation, such as the aforementioned basketball program. In examining the coachÕs assessment, a coachÕs perception has a significant impact in all areas of self-esteem except anxiety/assertiveness. External factors such as leadership/popularity and family/parents are important when people participate for fun; they create an internal element of anxiety/assertiveness. Leadership/popularity was the only significant positive relationship identified when the independent variable friends and self-esteem and its associated factors were examined. There is a very close relationship between peers and basketball as a social outlet. When the relationship between skill as a reason for participation and self-esteem and its associated factors was examined, the only variable not to be found significant was anxiety/assertiveness. Self-esteem, self-degradation, leadership/popularity, family/parents, and basketball self-esteem were all positively related. When achievement as the reason for participation was examined in relation to self-esteem, two significant positive relationships were identified: self-esteem total and leadership/popularity. Fitness was significantly, positively related to one component of self-esteem: family/parents; this suggests the importance of family/parent relationships in the development of a healthful outcome of youth sports programs. When others were given a reason for participation, the following were found to be significantly and positively related: self-esteem total, self-degradation, leadership/popularity, and family/parent. There is a positive external influence that is social as well as familial which points to the importance of other peopleÕs opinions. Energy was related significantly to only one factor, basketball self-esteem. This suggests that participating in basketball to release energy may not be a good reason because it is a difficult sport to master. The findings of Groves & HineÕs (1989) study substantiate the importance of these factors, but, they also indicate that the coachÕs assessments of ability and intention of the participant are also extremely important factors in the development of self-esteem (Groves & Hines, 1989). Moral Development.

Sport offers opportunities for children to identify and resolve moral issues. Sport is one such environment in which children learn to negotiate between right and wrong as they interact with peers and adults. Moral issues in sport have primarily been studied from the researcherÕs perspective, with the childÕs perspective relatively ignored (Stuart, 2003). Historically, there are two primary theoretical frameworks scholars have utilized in an attempt to gain insights with respect to moral development as it relates to sport. This includes the social learning approach and the structural development approach. The social learning approach focuses on how children learn aggressive and prosocial behaviors through the social influence processes of modeling and reinforcement. At the center of the social learning approach is the role of significant others (e.g., adults, coaches, and peers) who provide modeling and reinforcement for appropriate or inappropriate behaviors. The structural development approach provides insight into the cognitive processes of childrenÕs moral development by focusing on moral reasoning as a measure of moral development. Moral reasoning has been conceptualized as ways in which individuals choose solutions to moral issues and the maturity level of those solutions (Stuart, 2003). James Rest (1994), a scholar at the University of Minnesota, developed a four-component model that identified four major determinants of moral behavior. The first component represents the process of identifying the moral issue in a situation and being aware of how oneÕs actions might affect another, which requires empathy and role-taking skills. The second component reflects the process of making a judgment about what ought to be done when faced with a moral issue, while the third component represents the process of determining how moral values are prioritized in the face of an issue. Finally, the fourth component is the action taken when reasoning about a moral issue, which requires strength of character to do the right thing. Specifically, several recent investigations have used RestÕs four-component approach to moral development in sport that expands beyond the sole focus on moral reasoning. Specifically, Stuart and Ebbeck (1995) consulted with children ages 10-14 years to investigate the relationship between RestÕs four-component model and approval of issues that reflected antisocial behaviors in youth basketball. The purpose of this study was two-fold. The first was to examine the content and context of childrenÕs self-identified issues experienced in a variety of sports compared to issues used in previous moral development work in sport. The second purpose was to determine whether self-identified issues in sport were of a moral, conventional, or psychological nature (Stuart & Ebbeck, 1995). The children perceived many events in the sporting environment to be unfair. More specifically, these athletes seemed to address the actions of others within this competitive environment, which in turn had a negative effect on themselves and others. Participants also identified experiences believed to be unfair when they perceived the officials to show favoritism to the other team and issues of fairness when the coach showed favoritism to specific members of the team. Other children shared stories of parents being unfair. The children in this study provided 32 quotes concerning issues about certain game behaviors that they perceived as negatively affecting others consisting of themes labeled disrespecting opponents, physical harm, and intimidation. There were also 23 quotes representing themes labeled teammate misbehavior, selfishness, ridiculing teammates, losing self-control, and dishonesty (Stuart & Ebbeck, 1995). The content and context of the self-identified issues both confirmed and expanded upon previous literature. However, as an extension of previous work, the children in this study shared numerous experiences outside a game setting. The children perceived that adults were the protagonists in several moral issues that extend our understanding of the moral influence adults have on childrenÕs lives. Issues of favoritism, making poor decisions, and pressure to play were all things the children viewed as negative interactions with adults. This theme confirms past moral development literature that has identified fairness as a central moral issue for both younger and older children (Damon, 1988; Turial, 2002). It has been determined that as children learn rules and regulations within the context of sport they also learn many individuals break those rules and regulations. The violation of these written rules and unwritten mores included adults who are also involved in the educational process (Damon, 1988). It may be surprising that children this age would question moral authority and, in fact, view it as a part of moral or psychological issue, however, it has been found that as children mature they begin to be able to determine when the adultÕs moral authority is legitimate. Further, Damon (1988) found that in later childhood development, children were able to justify questioning obedience of parents because they were becoming aware of the fact that parents could be wrong. Past research has focused heavily on aggression as a central moral issue in youth sport. Children have shared stories of physical and verbal aggression reflected in past sport investigations. Damon (1988) cited consideration for others as well as honesty as two of the major moral concerns of children. The themes identified in DamonÕs study, which corroborate past moral literature in sport, include responsibility, sportsmanship, honesty, physical harm, and selfishness. The children identified several unique perspectives regarding the fairness of adultsÕ actions that included perceived judgment errors by officials as well as favoritism by coaches and officials. To date, sport dilemmas have been focused on the childÕs or teammateÕs actions, however, it was interesting to note that the children notice adultsÕ actions within a moral context and can interpret actions they believe have a negative effect on themselves or others (Damon, 1988). The results can also be interpreted from within a social learning theory perspective with regard to the influence of significant others. The children identified issues of favoritism, the elimination of choices, special treatment of certain players, and unfair treatment by parent-coaches. Beyond skill development of young athletes, it is equally important to address the psychosocial aspects of youth sport participation. This study offers insights into one of the often ignored social issues experienced by children in sport as well as the context in which they occur. Future investigations that incorporate childrenÕs real-life experiences with moral, conventional, and psychological issues in sport can further our understanding of childrenÕs moral awareness (Damon, 1988).

Method

Questionnaire

1-4 Likert Scale

• 1) The soccer program teaches us (my child) how to be fair with each other.
• 2) In this soccer program, I (my child) learned how to get along better with other people.
• 3) This program has helped me (my child) to make good choices about how I (he/she) should act.
• 4) Because of this soccer program, I am (my child is) better able to control my (his/her) behavior.
• 5) This program has helped me (my child) learn how to be a good sport.
• 6) I (My child) would rather play soccer than watch television or play video games.
• 7) This soccer program has taught me (my child) how important it is to stay healthy.
• 8) My coach makes me (my child) want to be a better person.
• 9) I think my (our) coach is a good role model.
• 10) It is important for me (my child) to play well to please my coach.
• 11) It is important for me (my child) to play well to please my parents.
• 12) It is important for me (my child) to play well to please myself (him/herself).
• 13) It is more important to win than (for my child) to have fun.
• 14) It is okay to break a rule on the field as long as I don't (my child doesn't) get caught.
• 15) Playing soccer makes me (my child) feel better about myself.
• 16) I (My child) started playing soccer because my parents (I) made me (him/her).

Data Collection and Data Analysis

Data analysis consisted of comparing the self-reported scores of female athletes in a 12 and under, 14 and under and 16 and under girlsÕ recreational and elite programs as well as the parents of those athletes. Mean scores for each of the groups (recreational athletes (n=144) vs. elite athletes (n=60) and recreational parents (n=211) vs. elite parents (n=104) were compared using a two-sample t test with corrections to accommodate the differences in sample sizes. In all but three comparisons the groups were found to have significantly different self-reported scores. The data are displayed in Figure 1.

Results

Question 1

The soccer program teaches us (my child) how to be fair with each other. Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.28 (1.17) which was significantly higher (t=23, p<=0.0001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes 3.81 (1.14). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.26 (0.84) which was significantly higher (t=16, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes 4.10 (0.97). Perhaps the elite athletes as well as the parents value the competition as opposed to moral and ethical lessons that can be learned within the context of sport.

Question 2

In this soccer program, I (my child) learned how to get along better with other people. Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.32 (0.95) which was significantly higher (t=25, p<=0.0001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes 3.90 (0.93). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.61 (0.77) which was significantly higher (t=38, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes 4.22 (1.01). Previous literature has suggested that there is a social dynamic to youth sport. Additional insights need to be made into the motives of athletes and parents in elite competition. Clearly, the dynamics within the context are changing given the heightened expense, intensity and expectations on the part of all involved. Question 3

This program has helped me (my child) to make good choices about how I (he/she) should act. Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.40 (0.82) which was significantly higher (t=40, p<=0.0001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes of 3.74 (0.94). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.30 (0.62) which was significantly higher (t=36, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes 3.98 (0.88). There seems to be a correlation between the intensity associated with elite competition and behavior as acknowledged by both athletes and parents.

Question 4

Because of this soccer program, I am (my child is) better able to control my (his/her) behavior.

Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.08 (1.08) which was significantly higher (t=50, p<=0.0001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes of 3.12 (1.06). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.14 (1.12) which was significantly higher (t=26, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes 3.84 (1.04). Recreational athletes appear to have less Òat stakeÓ than elite competitors. Parents of elite athlete appear to acknowledge that there seems to be more at stake as well. An interesting follow-up study might include whether there are concerns on the part of parents of elite sport competitors or whether this is accepted or if it simply comes with the territory, so to speak, with elite competition.

Question 5

This program has helped me (my child) learn how to be a good sport.

Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.56 (0.87) which was significantly higher (t=43, p<=0.0001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes 3.72 (1.12). The parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.04 (1.43) which was also significantly higher (t=8, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parentsÕ of the elite athletes 3.96 (0.74). This question is essentially an extension of question four. There seems to be a correlation between recreational competition and an emphasis on sportsmanship.

Question 6

I (My child) would rather play soccer than watch television or play video games. Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.32 (0.80) which was significantly lower (t=24, p<=0.0001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes .60 (0.63). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.91 (0.90) which was significantly higher (t=18, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes of 4.80 (0.44). It is notable that there appears to be some disagreement between the recreational parents and their children on this issue. Question 7

This soccer program has taught me (my child) how important it is to stay healthy.

Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.67 (0.48) which was significantly higher (t=61, p<=0.0001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes of 3.91 (0.72). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.55 (1.12) which was significantly higher (t=35, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes 4.31 (0.44). Introduction to a healthy lifestyle appears to be correlated with recreational as opposed to elite competition. The researchers found this result to be quite interesting given the emphasis place on sport by those involved in elite competition.

Question 8

My coach makes me (my child) want to be a better person.

Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.72 (0.46) which was significantly higher (t=77, p<=0.0001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes 3.22 (1.16). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 3.91 (0.90) which was significantly lower (t=5, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes of 3.96 (1.01). Differences in how parents and children interpret Òbetter personÓ may be factoring into the discrepancy between the differing populations.

Question 9

I think my (our) coach is a good role model. Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.83 (0.38) which was significantly higher (t=81, p<=0.0001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes of 4.30 (0.36). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 3.96 (0.64) which was also significantly higher (t=6, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes 3.89 (1.20). Clearly, there is a different mission within the context of recreational involvement versus that of elite competition. Perhaps the increased tension associated with elite competition brings about heightened anxiety and stress resulting in outward vocal expression misinterpreted by athletes and parents alike.

Question 10

It is important for me (my child) to play well to please my coach.

Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.20 (1.15) which was not significantly different (t=0.478, p=0.634) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes 4.21 (1.16). Note that this is one of the three that are not significantly different. Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 3.92(1.21) which was significantly higher (t=26, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes 4.24 (1.11). This countered anticipated results.

Question 11

It is important for me (my child) to play well to please my parents.

Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.20 (1.12) which was significantly lower (t=3, p<=0.001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes 4.23 (0.47). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 2.72 (0.71) also significantly lower (t=2.81 (1.14), p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes. Note the disconnect between what the students and parents think on this issue. These results also provide an explanation for the results associated with question ten.

Question 12

It is important for me (my child) to play well to please myself (him/herself).

Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.60 (0.76) which was significantly higher (t=14, p<=0.0001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes 4.40 (0.81). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.11 (0.48) which was also significantly higher (t=15, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes 4.01 (0.63).

Question 13

It is more important to win than (for my child) to have fun.

Recreational athletes reported an average score of 3.48 (1.69) which was significantly higher (t=21, p<=0.0001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes 2.84 (1.67). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 2.76 (0.84) which was significantly lower (t=67, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes 3.47 (1.02). Note that there is a difference between students and parents here as well.

Question 14

It is okay to break a rule on the field as long as I don't (my child doesn't) get caught.

Recreational athletes reported an average score of 2.84 (1.91) which was not significantly different (t=0.874, p=0.386) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes 2.87 (1.90). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 2.14 (1.87) which was significantly lower (t=, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes of 2.87 (1.82).

Question 15

Playing soccer makes me (my child) feel better about myself.

Recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.56 (0.65) which was significantly higher (t=4, p<=0.0001) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes 4.51 (0.72). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 4.22 (0.52) which was significantly lower (t=28, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes 4.40 (0.61). Again, this is an interesting response when one considers the social benefits that one usually associates with elite competition. This is an area of research that is worthy of additional scholarly consideration.

Question 16

I (My child) started playing soccer because my parents (I) made me (him/her).

Recreational athletes reported an average score of 3.29 (1.83) which was not significantly different (t=0.581, p=0.564) when compared with an average score for the elite athletes 3.27 (1.92). Parents of the recreational athletes reported an average score of 2.41 (1.42) which was significantly lower (t=92, p<=0.0001) when compared with the parents of the elite athletes 3.30 (0.73). Motivation on the part of both athletes and parents has been analyzed and is worthy of additional consideration.

Discussion

There have been numerous studies on youth participation in sport as it relates to motivation. As suggested in the literature, Gill et. al. (1983) studied perceived physical ability and task and ego goal orientation as a means for understanding young peopleÕs motivation and found correlations therein (1983). Klint and Weiss (1987) found that young gymnasts with higher perceptions of social competence rated relationships with friends and team atmosphere as important motives for participation. Ewing (1981) and Whitehead (1995) alluded to social-approval, goal orientation and demonstrated a relationship between participation and motivation. Lewthwaite and Piparo (1993) described the relative importance of social acceptance and positive social experience orientations as being of quintessential importance within the context of an intense individual sport. Schilling and Hayashi (2001) found that they defined positive and negative experiences through socially oriented perspectives such as; contributing to the team, social support and approval, pleasing others, and affiliation. It has also been suggested that sport emphasizes affiliation experiences and positive affect at school (Anderman, 1999; Ryan, Hicks, & Midgley, 1997). The focus of the research in this context emphasized the development and maintenance of mutually satisfying relationships. Relationship goals (Anderman, 1999; Anderman & Anderman, 1999; Ryan et al., 1997) as well as positive social experiences (Lewthwaite & Piparo, 1993) provided additional examples of this affiliation orientation. Finally, Allen (2003) examined ideologies surrounding social motivational orientations and perceptions of belonging. There is a noticeable gap in the literature. Little research has been done on the relationship between sport and moral and ethical development. In addition, no scholars incorporated the ideologies surrounding parental perceptions of sport or the dynamics surrounding more intensive, elite competition versus recreational competition. Stuart (2003) suggested that moral issues in sport have primarily been studied from the researcherÕs perspective. The literature has largely ignored the childÕs perspective. This investigation examined not only the childÕs perspective but perhaps more importantly, the parents perspective. Parents are an integral part of the youth sport experience given their role in travel, covering expenses and the increasing influence they have on their young athletes and some might argue coaches. Stuart and Ebbeck (1995) focused their attention on athleteÕs aged 10-14 years to investigate the relationship between antisocial behaviors and competition in youth basketball. They utilized RestÕs (1994) moral developmental framework in doing so. The results from this qualitative study yielded quotes which fell into categories including teammate misbehavior, selfishness, ridiculing teammates, losing self-control, and dishonesty (Stuart & Ebbeck, 1995). Once again considerations involving parental versus athlete ideologies and elite versus recreational competition were not considered. Another limitation was the fact that their emphasis was on boys in youth sport as opposed to the focus of our attention which was girls. Girls are becoming increasingly worthy of scholarly inquiry due to increased participation rates and the intensity in which girls are participating which rivals or surpasses that of the boys. Future research should focus on the gender differences within elite youth sport club dynamics. Work done by Damon (1988) and Turial (2002) provided the body of knowledge with information surrounding the fact that children perceived that adults were the protagonists in several moral issues. Interestingly DamonÕs (1988) findings determined that children learn rules and regulations within the context of sport even as they apply to the world, at large. This is a powerful construct that had not been considered. The same study also provided insights into the sport culture teaching individuals to break rules and regulations. Of particular interest is the notion that children themselves are concerned about these moral shortcomings. Consideration for others as well as honesty and fairness were listed as three of the major moral concerns of children (Damon, 1988, Turial, 2002). Gender differences with respect to morality and ethical development is also an area that should be considered by scholars for future research.

Finally, of particular interest is the fact that children are indeed morally aware of shortcomings on the part of the parents. In other words, children notice adultsÕ moral actions and can interpret them as having a negative effect on themselves as well as others (Damon, 1988). We would venture to guess that parents do not realize the extent to which young athletes are aware of parentsÕ actions. If this information could be made available, perhaps parents would reconsider some of the outlandish behaviors and actions on the part of parents when viewing sporting events.

References

• Allen, Justine B. (2003). Social motivation in youth sport. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 25, 551-567.
• Anderman, L.H. (1999). Classroom goal orientation, school belonging and social goals as predictors of studentsÕ positive and negative affect following the transition to middle school. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 32, 89-103.
• Anderman, L.H., & Anderman, E.M. (1999). Social predictors of changes in studentsÕ achievement goal orientations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 21-37.
• Damon, W. (1988). The moral child: Nurturing childrenÕs natural moral growth. New York: The Free Press..
• Ewing, M.E. (1981). Achievement orientations and sport behavior of males and females. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
• Gill, D.L., Gross, J.B. & Huddleston, S. (1983). Participation motivation in youth sports. International Journal of Sports Psychology, 14, 1-14.
• Groves, David L., and Scott Hines. (1989). Sports competition and its influence on self- esteem development. Adolescence, 24(96), 861-870.
• Klint, K.A., & Weiss, M.R. (1987). Perceived competence and motives for participating in youth sports: A test of HarterÕs competence motivation theory. Journal of Sport Psychology, 9, 55-65.
• Lewthwaite, R., & Piparo, A.J. (1993). Goal orientations in young competitive athletes: Physical achievement, social-relational, and experiential concerns. Journal of Research in Personality, 27, 103-117.
• Rest, J.R. (1994). Background: Theory and research. In J.R. Rest & D. Narvaez (Eds.), Moral development in the profession: Psychology and applied ethics (pp. 1-26). Hillsdale, NJ. Erlbaum.
• Roeser, R.W., Midgley, C., & Urdan, T.C. (1996). Perceptions of the school psychological environment and early adolescentsÕ psychological and behavioral functioning in school: The mediating role of goals and belonging. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 408-422.
• Ryan, A.M., Hicks, L., & Midgley, C. (1997). Social goals, academic goals, & avoiding seeking help in the classroom. Journal of Early Adolescence, 17, 152-171.
• Sapp, M., & Haubenstricker, J. (1978). Motivation for joining and reasons for not continuing in youth sports programs in Michigan. Paper presented at the American Association of Health, Physical Education and Recreation National Convention, Kansas City, Missouri.
• Schilling, T.A., & Hayashi, C.T. (2001). Achievement motivation among high school basketball and cross-country athletes: A personal investment perspective. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13, 103-128.
• Stuart, Moira E. (2003). Moral issues in sport: The childÕs perspective. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74(4), 445-454.
• Stuart, M.E., & Ebbeck, V. (1995). The influence of perceived social approval on moral development in youth sport. Pediatric Exercise Science, 7, 270-280.
• Turial, E. (2002). The culture of morality: Social development, context, and conflict. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Whitehead, J. (1995). Multiple achievement orientations and participation in youth sport: A cultural and developmental perspective. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, 431-452.

The Benefits of Physical Activity for Cognitive Functioning among The Ageing

David V. Stimpson
Brigham Young University
Department of Psychology

Steven Heiner
Brigham Young University
Department of Health Sciences

Gary Measom
Brigham Young University
Department of Nursing

Accepted: September, 2004

ABSTRACT

Given the trend toward a wellness model with health benefits-based research and the 21st Century role of leisure services in promoting health for older adults, the Huntsman World Senior Games research team sponsored a study to determine how leisure services activity relates to health benefits of cognitive functioning among senior athletes. Public venues for leisure services were utilized for activities of basketball, bowling, bridge, cycling, golf, horseshoes, mountain biking, racquetball, road races, soccer, softball, swimming, table tennis, track & field, triathlon, and volleyball. Participants in these events provided information about activity-based health benefits on a variety of physiological and psychological assessments. The physiological assessments included: bone density, glaucoma screening, blood pressure, mammography, and colon cancer screening. Self-report psychological assessment included lifestyle indicators such as amount, frequency, and kinds of physical activity; consumption data on alcohol, tobacco and medications; and the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (MMMSE, Teng and Chui, 1987). The MMMSE is an often used questionnaire for assessing cognitive impairment and dementia. The physiological and psychological assessments were administered by an interdisciplinary research team of nursing, leisure services, and gerontology faculty and students, who were trained in the appropriate procedures associated with each assessment. The research procedures were piloted during previous Huntsman World Senior Games events (1993-1997). Each phase of pilot research provided important critiques and modifications of the assessment process.

Correspondence should be directed to:

Howard R. Gray
Huntsman World Senior Games Research Team
Department of Recreation Management and Youth Leadership
Suite 273-L Richards Building
Provo, UT 84602
Phone: (801) 378-3506
email: Howard_Gray@byu.edu

The Benefits of Physical Activity for Cognitive Functioning among The Ageing

Introduction

Two historic changes are shaping how gerontology services will be conceived and funded in the 21st Century (Payne, 1998). Fundamental changes in health and health care and a simultaneous repositioning of municipal leisure services have prompted the Huntsman World Senior Games to establish strong research linkages between health care services and municipal leisure services in St. George, Utah. The new health benefit-related research initiatives are interdisciplinary and will have a major impact on the future of gerontology. The changes in health and health care have created a fundamental debate about the nature of disease as well as quality of care issues. One recent authoritative study about older adults concluded that more than 70 percent of morbidity and mortality in the United States is preventable (Nesse & Williams, 1994). In economic terms, health purposes consume approximately 14% of the United States economy. If 70 percent of the morbidity and mortality costs are preventable, then it is possible to change about 10% of the United States economy. New health promotion and disease prevention strategies will have to take into consideration the healthy lifestyle circumstances and leisure behavioral patterns of older adults. For municipal leisure services, in particular, there is a fundamental debate about the nature of public services gravitating toward the public policy area of ÒhealthÓ or another policy area, such as Òtourism.Ó Research indicates that approximately four out of five residents of the United States and Canada use local parks and leisure services (Godbey, Graefe & James, 1992; Harper, Neider, Godbey & Lamont, 1996). Among the age cohort participating in the Huntsman World Senior Games, studies indicate that a vast majority of the 50 years and older cohort use local leisure services. In fact, those most likely to use local leisure services ÒfrequentlyÓ are between the ages of 66 and 75. Additionally, this older group of participants cite health benefits as the prime reason for their participation in leisure services. Godbey (1992, 1996) identified frequent references to the health benefits of Òa chance for exerciseÓ and Òstress reductionÓ among older adults. There is some precedent of health research guidelines targeting specific leisure services that have measurable wellness outcomes. The Healthy People 2000 statement of national opportunities from the United States Department of Health and Human Services identifies increases in community availability and accessibility of physical activity sponsored by public leisure services. These venues for leisure service activity are similar to those used by the Huntsman World Senior Games in St. George, Utah. They include the following: hiking, biking and fitness trails, public swimming pools and acres of open space facilities (Healthy People 2000, U. S. Department of Health and Human Services).

Gerontology services in the 21st Century will be using a wellness model that combines the concerns of health and leisure services. Changes in health policy and health care organizations will seek to extend healthy lives and establish health benefit-based research. At the same time, public leisure services are beginning to utilize the concept of benefits-based research to demonstrate that programs and services contribute to the health of both individuals and communities. Health benefits-based research documenting a relationship between active lifestyles and physical well-being has long been recognized in the literature. Physical activity has also been demonstrated to have positive consequences for a number of psychological dimensions. Gleser and Mendelberg (1990) identified physical activity as an effective treatment for moderate depression and for enhancing self-esteem. More recently, Covey and Felts (1991) reported that physically active adolescent women had better coping characteristics and a more positive self image than a sedentary comparison group. Stimpson, Heiner, and Gray (1993) found that active people, regardless of age or gender, have higher self-esteem than sedentary people. Stimpson, Heiner and Gray (1993) reported that physical activity is an even more important accompaniment of high self-esteem for senior adults than it is for young people.

The Statement of Purpose

The present study extended the examination of the health benefits of a physically active lifestyle to explore its possible advantages in cognitive functioning. Specifically, it was hypothesized that a moderate level of physical activity may suppress, or even eliminate, the decline in cognitive functioning that often accompanies ageing.

The Procedure

Given the trend toward a wellness model with health benefits-based research and the 21st Century role of leisure services in promoting health for older adults, the Huntsman World Senior Games research team sponsored a study to determine how leisure services activity relates to health benefits of cognitive functioning among senior athletes. Public venues for leisure services were utilized for activities of basketball, bowling, bridge, cycling, golf, horseshoes, mountain biking, racquetball, road races, soccer, softball, swimming, table tennis, track & field, triathlon, and volleyball. Participants in these events provided information about activity-based health benefits on a variety of physiological and psychological assessments. The physiological assessments included: bone density, glaucoma screening, blood pressure, mammography, and colon cancer screening. Self-report psychological assessment included lifestyle indicators such as amount, frequency, and kinds of physical activity; consumption data on alcohol, tobacco and medications; and the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (MMMSE, Teng and Chui, 1987). The MMMSE is an often used questionnaire for assessing cognitive impairment and dementia. The physiological and psychological assessments were administered by an interdisciplinary research team of nursing, leisure services, and gerontology faculty and students, who were trained in the appropriate procedures associated with each assessment. The research procedures were piloted during previous Huntsman World Senior Games events (1993-1997). Each phase of pilot research provided important critiques and modifications of the assessment process.

An additional questionnaire representing almost 200 participants in the 1997 Huntsman World Senior Games (HWSG) provided self-report information about their involvement with the games. HWSG senior athletes wrote about overcoming major physical handicaps to participate. Some wrote about benefits of friendships developed during the games. Others wrote about medical screenings that saved their lives and caught potentially dangerous medical problems early enough to be treated on a timely basis. This self-report information augmented the health benefits-based assessments that were physiological and psychological in nature.

The Participants

A total of 220 volunteers qualified for inclusion in the health benefits-based research study by virtue of their having at least three hours of active physical involvement per week on a regular basis and being 50 to 90 years of age. There were 142 males and 78 females with 8 to 21 years of formal education.

The Results

In order to make comparisons of the data from this physically active sample with some normative data from a large epidemiological study of dementia completed by Tombaugh, McDowell, Kristjansson, and Hubley (1996), subjects were divided into eight age ranges (50-54, 55-59, 50-64, 65-69, 70-74, 75-79, 80-84, and 85-90). They were also sorted into three groups according to years of education (0-8, 9-12, and 12 or more). Additionally, they were sorted into groups of gender. These data are summarized in Table 1, which shows the MMMSE mean scores by age group, years of education, and gender as reported by Tombaugh, et al (1996) for the normative group, and the parallel scores obtained from physically active participants in the present study.

On the normative data in Table 1, Tombaugh, et al. (1996) indicated that neither age nor gender contributed a significant portion of the variance in MMMSE scores beyond what was accounted for by education. However, years of education indicated a significant positive correlation with MMMSE scores. A three-factor ANOVA of the Senior Athlete Data in Table 1 is presented in Table 2.

These results indicate no significant contribution to MMMSE scores by age, education or gender, thereby differentiating these senior athletes from the normative group in the elimination of education level as a contributor to cognitive functioning.

The Discussion

The Senior Athletes evidence an advantage in cognitive functioning over the Normative Sample for all ages samples, for each Education Level and for both Genders. This advantage is best understood to be a consequence of a physically active life-style. Even though the amount of physical activity required in this study for classification as a Senior Athlete (at least one hour, three times per week) is not excessive, the health benefit-based assessment in terms of cognitive functioning is substantial. In fact, it appears to be the case that dementia that has been thought to be a natural accompaniment of aging, is not evident among those who are physically active. For this group of senior athletes, none of the other independent variables ( gender, age, and years of education) identified by Tombaugh, McDowell, Kristjansson, and Hubley (1996) are determinants of cognitive functioning. In this study, physical activity is the only important variable that influences cognitive functioning that often declines with advanced aging. Physical activity seems to improve cognitive functioning in addition to the self-reported health benefits of Òa chance for exerciseÓ and Òstress reductionÓ among older adults (Godbey, 1992).

The References

• AARP Andrus Foundation www.andrus.org
• Covey, L.A. and Feltz, D.L. (1991) Physical Activity and Adolescent Female Psychological Development. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 20 (4) 183-196.
• Driver, B.L., Brown, P. and Peterson, G (1991) The Benefits of Leisure. State College: Venture Publishing.
• Gleser, J. and Medelberg, H. (1990) Exercise and Sport in Mental Health: A Review of the Literature, Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences, 27 (2), 99-112.
• Godbey, G., Graefe, A. and James, S. (1992) The Benefits of Local Recreation and Park Services: A Nationwide Study of the Perceptions of the American Public. Ashburn, VA:NRPA.
• Harper, J., Neider, D., Godbey, G. and Lamont, D. (1996) the Use and Benefits of Local Government Recreation and Park Services in Edmonton, Alberta. Winnipeg: Health, Leisure and Human Performance Institute, University of Manitoba.
• Healthy People 2000 Statement (1990) U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. Washington, D.C.:Federal Document
• Huntsman World Senior Games (HWSG) (1997) Tell Your Story. St George:Huntsman World Senior Games Publication
• National Institute of Aging www.nih.gov/nia
• Nesse, R. and Williams, G. (1996) Why we get Sick- The New Science of Darwinian Medicine. New York: Vintage Books.
• Payne, L., Orsega-Smith, B., Godbey, G. and Roy, M (1998) Local Parks and Health of Older Adults: Results of an Exploratory Study, Parks and Recreation. Ashburn,VA:NRPA
• Stimpson, D.V., Heiner, S.W. and Gray, H.R. (1993) Self-Esteem as a Function of Exercise, Age, and Gender. The Journal of Recreation and Leisure. 13 (1) 36-42.
• Tombaugh, T.M., McDowell, I. Kristjansson, B. and Hubley, A.M. (1996) Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE and the Modified-MMSE (MMMS): A Psychometric Comparison and Normative Data Psychological Assessment 8 (1), 48-59.

ABSTRACT

Over the last two decades, community recreation organizations have responded to the needs and desires of their constituency by increasing their offerings in the area of physical activity and fitness. The purpose of this study was to begin an exploration into this prevalence as well as ascertain the characteristics of indoor fitness facilities and services in community recreation, wellness, and fitness centers throughout the United States. Using asystematic sampling technique, 540 recreation professionals in community recreation settings were mailed a survey, 149 usable surveys returned. The major findings of this study include: l)The majority of respondents managed facilities serving populations of less than 70,000 with 20,000 to 30,000 square feet of assignable space, 25% of which was allocated for fitness. 2)75% of the respondents employed two or fewer full-time and 15 or less part-time fitness staff. 3)Percentage of assignable facility space dedicated to fitness activities was significantly linked to the community population and the number of fitness staff. 4)67% of facilities offering fitness programming required all fitness staff to be CPR certified. 5)Most respondents considered experience to be equivalent to a college degree for full-time position qualifications and more important than a college degree for part-time position qualifications. 6) Almost 70% of respondents who provide fitness programming have received fitness funding increases in the last five years. The increase in funding indicates a dedication to greater resources in the fitness area. The results lead to a number of implications for future study regarding staffing and space assignment.

KEYWORDS: Fitness, physical activity, community recreation, recreation facility.

Introduction

The period of the late 1970s to the present is one of unparalleled growth in the public's interest in structured fitness opportunities. While the "boom" in personal activities such as running occurred in the 1970s, the early 1980s are identified by most practitioners as the key era in which the fitness industry was born and began to develop (Germano, 2001). Clubs which provided fitness-focused activities emerged in many major cities in the United States and eventually found their way to smaller towns as well. By 1999, the number ofhealth clubs in the United States had reached an all-time high of 15,322 sites, with membership totaling over 10 million (Malek et al, 2002).

Due to this increased interest in fitness by a certain portion of the American public as well as an increasing prevalence of obesity and childhood obesity in another portion of the citizenry, public leisure service providers have begun to focus on the provision of physically active opportunities. In 1992, the National Park and Recreation Association (NRPA) responded to ". ..the profession's expanding national fitness and wellness agenda. .." (NRpA Dateline p. 4) by introducing anew NRP A Spokesperson for Fitness and Wellness. According to Payne (2002), the recent NRP A reorganization was accomplished "to better address the growing recognition of and interest in the role that public recreation plays in health promotion" (p.2). Practitioners within the recreation and leisure field have begun to see the potential impact of physically active leisure and fitness opportunities on the health and wellness of community members (Campagna, et al, 2002). State and local health agencies within cities and municipalities have developed funding projects for ". ..specific facilities or services of recreation and park agencies which have measurable wellness outcomes" (Godbey 1997, p. 105).

The U.S. Department ofHealth and Human Services Healthy People 2000 and Health People 2010 reports target physical activity as a 'Leading Health Indicator'. The 2010 report states that, "in 1997, only 15 percent of adults performed the recommended amount of physical activity, and 40 percent of adults engaged in no leisure-time physical activity" (p. 26). Lack of convenience of facilities is cited as one of the major barriers to adult physical activity. (U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, 2001). The lack of convenience may be related to location, cost, or any number of factors including matters as pedestrian as adequate apparel and footwear. Focus group research conducted by Henderson et. al. (2001) supported the need for public park and recreation departments to provide physical activity opportunities through a range of settings, facilities, and programs, thus providing convenience of access for the public at-large. In the last two decades, numerous authors such as Fearn (1994), Fridinger, (1994), Spangler (2001), and Ostrander (2004), have encouraged municipal recreation providers with tips on providing physical fitness activities, meeting industry standards, and developing strategies for partnering with others in the community to provide fitness opportunities. Previous studies have shown that accessibility, related to geographic location, availability of facilities and programming, and transportation, is a constraint for participation (Henderson, et al, 2001; Compagna, et al, 2002; Kristjansdottir and Vilhjalmsson, 2001 ). When examining the issue of convenience, a question of the prevalence of physical activity opportunities arises. There is a dearth of the literature related to the types of facilities that are being provided by municipal, county, and special district providers to address physical activity and physical fitness. This study begins an exploration on that topic. Due to the wide variety of activities that could be labeled "physical activity," the researchers chose one area of community recreation offerings, "fitness," due to its focus on promoting the physical fitness outcomes addressed on Healthy People 2010.

Purpose of the Research

The purpose of this study was to explore the various characteristics of facilities and services in community recreation, wellness, and fitness centers tI United States. Questions related to facility space, percentage of space dedicat{ activities, fitness staffing patterns, and fitness staff background requirement w through a survey of community recreation center directors.

Methods

A list of community recreation center directors was provided by the N. Recreation Association. Using a systematic sampling technique one-half ofthl organizations that were in the United States of America (n=540) were mailed : directors to whom surveys were mailed, 13 returned the surveys unopened or I the study because they did not manage community recreation centers. There " returned surveys deemed usable for data analysis.

The survey, divided into three sections, was designed to address reseal regarding the degree to which fitness services are offered by community recre the resources allocated to those services. The first section addressed facility cl staffing. Respondents were asked to complete this section even if they offered services. Fitness personnel employed and the requirements for employment w the second section. The concluding section requested information related to sf programming and equipment. Content validity of the survey was determined 1: individuals in the community recreation field. Surveys were mailed to particip 2003. A follow up letter was issued three weeks after the initial mailing. Respl received until late spring of the same year.

Respondents were provided instructions and definitions of certain key terms in the cover page of the survey. Operational definitions were also included for fitness services and fitness programs. For the purpose of the survey, fitness services were considered to be 'any programming, facility, or equipment used by patrons for the specific purpose of improving fitness.' Fitness programs were considered to be 'any program offered through the facility designed with the primary goal of enhancing the physical fitness of participants. , Data analysis included only descriptive statistics since the focus of the survey was not comparative in nature. Chi-Square was calculated for selected variables while Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to identify significant differences between groups when indicated. Alpha level was set at 0.05.

Results

The data presented in this paper are related to facilities, staffing, and personnel requirements of employees in community recreation facilities. Table 1 shows the characteristics of the facilities from which responses were received. The table is broken down to show overall data, information from those which offered fitness services, and from those which did not offer any fitness services. For the purposes of data reporting, county and special district funded facilities were placed together in a category entitled "Special District" and hospitals and private nonprofit funded facilities were places into the category entitled "Other." As is evident from the table, very few of those facilities which offered no fitness services completed the truncated version of the questionnaire. [Insert Table 1 ]

The sample included a majority of respondents from facilities which were municipally funded (65%), and were from areas that had a population below 80,000 (70%). Manyofthe facilities neither did not keep data on the age of their patrons nor had such a wide range in the ages that they did not respond to a question regarding 'the average age of patrons' . Characteristics of the median facility included square footage of 20,000 to 30,000, full-time employee numbers of3 to 5, and a part-time staff of21 to 30. Forty-one percent of those offering fitness programming dedicated more than 40% of total assignable space to fitness activities, 79% had at least one full-time fitness staff, and over 60% had more than six part-time fitness staffers. Over 69% of those facilities offering fitness services or equipment to their patrons had received an increase in capital outlay for fitness equipment and services in the previous five years. Forty- five percent reported an increase in capital outlay for fitness equipment and services in the last two years.

The median range of staff members who were designated in full-time fitness positions were 1-2 with 6-10 part-time fitness staff members. Forty-five percent of the organizations do not require a degree for fitness staffmembers, 32% require only full-time staff to have an appropriate degree, and only 5.5% required a degree for all fitness employees. Typically, only specific fitness staff members such as aerobics and group exercise instructors were required to have certifications. Certification of all fitness staff members was required by 13.4% of respondents with 15.7% requiring no certification. Sixty-seven percent of facilities offering fitness programming required all fitness staff to be CPR certified while 19.1% required certification of only full-time fitness staff. Additionally, a sizable portion of the respondents who offered fitness programming (13.9%) had no CPR certification requirements of staff.

Respondents were given scenarios regarding education and certification ] full-time and part-time positions. The bulk of the sample considered experience college degree for full-time position qualifications and considered experience to important than a college degree for part-time positions. For the purposes of analysis, data were categorized by the following faci characteristics: source of funding, population of the region served, assignable sI of assignable space used primarily for fitness activities, and increases in capital, equipment and services. Frequency data are shown in Tables 2 -4. [Insert Tables 2-4] Source of Funding

Chi-Square revealed significant interactions between source of funding ~ part-time staff (i(12) = 25.01, p<0.015), number ofpart-time fitness staff (i(lO) = p<0.001 ), reported familiarity with fitness certifications (i (8) = 17.5, p<0.03), aJ capital outlay in recent years (X2(6) = 15.68, p<0.02). These variables did have in with funding source. Kruskal- Wallis tests did confirm a significant difference b( the funding sources for number of part-time fitness staff (H(2)=6.87 , P<0.03) an familiarity with fitness certifications (H(2)=12.65, P<0.002). Thus the number of the number of full-time fitness staff, degree requirements of staffers, and certific requirements of staffers were independent of funding source. Kruskal-Wallis in< significant difference between funding sources for degree requirements of fitnes (H(2)=9.76, P<0.008) and percent of assignable space allocated to fitness service P<0.04).

A significant Chi Square (X2(8) = 21.28, p

Population of the Region Served

Variables related to staffing and staff requirements appeared to be independent of the size of the population served in this study. Kruskal-Wallis found a significant difference between population size groups and full-time fitness staff size (H(8)=20.36, P

Full-time staff (i(24) = 89.36, p

A significant difference was found between space groupings and number offull-time employees (H(6)=45.25, P

There was interdependence between percent of assignable space allocated primarily to fitness services and the number offull-time (X2(25) = 41.98, p<0.05), number offull- time fitness staff (H(4)=24.71, P<0.001), number ofpart-time fitness staff (H(4)=16.66, P<0.002), and perceived familiarity with fitness certifications (H(4)=17.52, P<0.002). Increases in Capital Outlay for Fitness

Respondents were asked whether or not the facility they operated had received an increase in capital outlay for fitness equipment or services in the last two, five, and ten years. For the purpose of data analysis only the most recent increase response was recorded. Thus, if a facility had received increases in capital outlay for fitness in the last five years and the last two years, only the last two years was used for analysis. The number of full-time fitness staff did showan interdependence with the number of years since the most recent capital outlay (i(15) = 28.09, p<0.02). Significant interdependence was also found between increases in capital outlay and source of funding (X2(12) = 22.32, p<0.03), population of the region served (i(24) = 37.91, p<0.04), and average age of the patrons (X2(18) = 69.11, p<0.001).

Kruskal- Wallis tests found significant differences between groups based on capital outlay response for the number offull-time fitness staff (H(3)=15.43, P<0.001), degree requirements of staff (H(3)=14.32, P<0.003), and perceived familiarity of certifications (H(3)=1 0.87, P<0.01 ).

Discussion

The findings of this study indicate that community recreation centers vary widely with regard to facility characteristics and staffing. Based upon the data acquired, it is difficult to make generalizations about community recreation centers in the United States. This is exemplified by the fact that while the median facility explored by this study has between 20,000 and 30,000 square feet of assignable space, the majority of respondents who offered fitness programming (46%), administer facilities with less than 20,000 square feet of assignable space. On the other end of the spectrum, 13% of those respondents actually have over 70,000 square feet within their facilities. This variance is reflected in most of the variables, including amount of space assigned to fitness activities, the number of full and part-time fitness staffmembers, and employment requirements of the staff.

A notable exception to this rule is in the area of capital outlay for fitness activities. Almost 70% of respondents who provide fitness programming have received fitness funding increases in the last five years with a majority of those receiving it in the last two years. This is an interesting phenomenon when one considers the concomitant decrease in support for physical education and fitness activities at the elementary and high school levels in recent years. Perhaps this illustrates a change in the community's perception of the suitable venue for lifelong fitness education and activities. This question requires further exploration and discussion.

Most of community fitness providers (79%) view the fitness area as important enough to dedicate at least one full-time position to it. However, it is interesting that these administrative responsibilities usually associated with such professional positions, do not warrant support for a college degree. Only ---% of the community fitness providers required a Bachelor's degree while some sort of fitness certification was required by approximately 80 percent of respondents in hiring at least some of their fitness staff members. This data indicates that for most organizations, there is a belief that experience in the fitness area will provide as adequate a training ground as a college degree. An implication that can be derived from the data is that, in staffing the fitness area of their organization, these directors place greater importance on specific knowledge and expertise than on general educational background. In order to further explore this implication, several questions must be asked regarding the content and predominant responsibilities of the fitness positions. It is not known if those who are hired for full-time positions are predominantly involved in the delivery of fitness services or the administrative practices involved in that delivery .A study which examines this job content and the corresponding qualifications for hire is required to adequately address this topic.

Not surprisingly, the percentage of assignable facility space dedicated to fitness activities was significantly linked to the number of fitness staff members employed at that facility. These characteristics are both indicative of the emphasis that an organization or a community places on the fitness service area. An organization that is committed to providing a wide range of fitness opportunities needs to set aside appropriate areas in which to offer those opportunities and must staff the areas and the programs accordingly. It is also not unexpected that the larger the community population and the greater the amount of assignable space that a facility included, the greater the number of overall staff members and number of fitness staff members, both full and part-time. It stands to reason that a larger community would require, and a larger facility would provide, more programs and services than a smaller one and, consequently, would require more staff members.

A result that is somewhat unanticipated given the trend toward increasingly strict adherence to risk management policies in recent years, (Hronek & Spengler, 2002) is the relatively large number of facilities which do not require CPR certification of all of their staff members (19%) and those who did not require CPR certification of any fitness staffmembers (13.9%). The great majority of facilities do require this certification of all of their fitness staff members, but it would be interesting to explore the reasoning behind policies that do not make such requirements.

An omission of note is the finding that a majority of organizations surveyed do not maintain specific records regarding the age of their patrons. As many programs may appeal to a particular age group and those who are in different age ranges respond differently to various marketing plans, it might be helpful to organizations to begin to collect these types of records. Information such as this could also be of assistance when creating budget requests, seeking grant-funded programs, or developing annual reports.

There are several limitations to this study. It is very likely that many of those community recreation agencies who do not currently administer fitness programs nor dedicate an area of their facilities to fitness programming did not respond to the questionnaire. We cannot therefore generalize that the percentage of community recreation centers in the United States who do not provide fitness programming is as low as the study's response rate (only 10% of those who actually responded did not provide fitness programming).

Another limitation includes respondent perception of one of the items on the survey. The original survey included an item requesting the FY02 operating budget of the facility. However, many of those responding could not break down their departmental operating budget into one that was specifically for the facility under discussion. Therefore, this item was omitted from the results and from the analysis of the data.

Implications

This survey provides basic information related to fitness services in community centers throughout the United States. However, it brings up several questions that require more in-depth exploration. The data collected indicate a need to explore the history of the emphasis on physical fitness activities in community parks and recreation programs. It is difficult to ascertain how long many of these programs have been in place and what importance they have within the full structure of community leisure service agencies. In addition, additional inspection is warranted regarding the general accessibility of fitness programming to the majority of the population within a community and the impact of lack of accessibility on participation in fitness and other physical activity.

Throughout the nation, the last ten years have seen a decrease in financial support for scholastic physical education. Yet, community support for fitness facilities has increased during that time. To explore this phenomenon, comparison studies within specific communities that explore the amount of financial support provided by those communities to the education and the recreation and parks sectors of their communities are necessary .

Within the public park and recreation field, as it would be interesting to compare the educational and experiential requirements for full-time positions in the fitness area with those of other programming areas. The data collected for this study suggest that even the full-time fitness position is not viewed as an administrative position as much as a "hands-on" service delivery position. However, further exploration of the job content of fitness positions and their respective requirements may assist in our understanding of the perspectives of community recreation providers regarding staff credentials.

References

• Compagna, P.D., Rehman, L.A., Nordqvist, D, Murphy, R.J., Ness, G, Porter, J., Rasmussen, R, & Thompson, A. (2002). Children's participation in physically active leisure: Income, gender, and regional differences. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 20(4), 170-184.
• Fearn, M. (1994). Shaping the future ofparks and recreation. Parks and Recreation, 29(10): 65- 69.
• Fridinger, F. & Provence, S. (1994). Promoting partnerships for physical activity. Parks and Recreation, 29(10): 52-58.
• Gennano, K. (2001). Influence by association. Fitness Management, 17(15),24-28.
• Godbey, G. (1997). Recreation and parks in a changing world: Becoming a health service. Parks andRecreation, 32(3): 91-108.
• Henderson, K.A., Neff, L.J., Sharpe, P .A., Greaney, M.L., Royce, S. W., Ainsworth, B.E. (2001). "It takes a village" to promote physical activity: The potential for public park and recreation departments. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 19(1 ), 23-41. Hronek, B.B. & Spengler, J.O. (2002). Legal liability in recreation and sports, Champaign, IL: Sagamore Publishing.
• Kristjansdottir, G., & Vilhjalmsson, R. (2001). Sociodemographic differences in patterns of sedentary and physically active behavior in older children and adolescents. ACTA Paediatrica, 90,429-435.
• Malek, M.H., Nalbone, D.P., Berger, D.E. & Cobum, J.W. (2002). Importance ofhealth science education for personal fitness trainers. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 16(1), 19-24.
• Fitness Facilities in Community Recreation 16 National Recreation and Parks Association. (1992). Dateline: NRPA. Parks and Recreation, 27(12), insert p.2
• Ostrander, T. (2004). Lifting the weight off municipal fitness facilities. Parks and Recreation, 39(7),58-61.
• Payne, L.L. (2002). Progress and challenges in repositioning leisure as a core component of health. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 20(4), 1-11.
• Spangler, K.J. (2001). Partnering to achieve our mission. Parks and Recreation, 39(7): 52-54.
• United States Department ofHealth and Human Services. (1991).
• Healthy People 2000. Retrieved July 10,2004 from httP://odph12.OSO12hs.dhhs.gov/pubs/hp2000/Default.htm
• United States Department ofHealth and Human Services. (2001). Healthy People 2010: Understanding and Improving Health. Retrieved July 10, 2004 from h!m:/ /www .healthYl2eO12le.gov/Document/

  Table 1 Topical Classification Area Percentile Ranks
  TABLE 1 Characteristics of Responding Facilities
  Classification	SAMPLE	FITNESS PROGRAM
  Municipality	66.0%	68.4%
  County	4.8%	3.0%
  Special Recreation District	17.0%	15.8%
  Private Non Profit	1.4%	1.5
  Other	10.9%	11.3

  Fitness Facilities in Community Recreation Tables 1
  

  • Population of Region Served N= 147 132
  • Less than 10,000 13.6% 15.2%
  • 10,000-20,000 14.3% 13.6%
  • 20,001-50,000 30.6% 31.1 %
  • 50,001-80,000 12.2% 11.4%
  • 80,001-110,000 7.5% 7.6%
  • 110,001-150,000 6.8% 7.6%
  • 150,001-250,000 6.8% 7.6%
  • 250,001-500,000 3.4% 3.8%
  • More than 500,000 4.8% 2.3%
  
  
  • Average Age of Patrons N= 141 127
  • Under 21 8.5% 6.3%
  • 21-30 5.0% 5.5%
  • 31-40 17.7% 18.9%
  • 41-50 13.5% 15.0%
  • 51-60 5.7% 5.5%
  • Over 60 2.8% 3.1%
  • Do not keep these data 46.8% 45.7%
  
  

  Fitness Facilities in Community Recreation Variable Sample Fitness Programming
  

  • Assignable Space in Square Feet * N= 133 123
  • Under 20,000 47.4% 46.3%
  • 20,001-30,000 12.8% 12.2%
  • 30,001-40,000 6.8% 6.5%
  • 40,001-50,000 9.8% 10.6%
  • 50,001-60,000 7.5% 8.1%
  • 60,001-70,000 3.8% 3.3%
  • Over 70,000 12.0% 13.0%
  
  
  • Percentage of Assignable Space Dedicated to Fitness Activities N= 121
  • Less than 10% 24.0%
  • 10-25% 24.0%
  • 25-40% 11.6%
  • 40-55% 20.7%
  • more than 55% 18.2%
  
  
  • Number of Full-Time Staff N= 133 127
  • 1-2 27.1% 26.8%
  • 3-5 28.6% 29.9%
  • 6-10 20.3% 20.5%
  • 11-20 17.3% 16.5%
  • More than 20 6.8% 6.3%
  
  
  • Number of Part-Time Staff N= 121 120
  • Less than 10 22.3% 22.5%
  • 10-20 20.7% 20.8%
  • 21-30 9.9% 10.0%
  • 31-40 7.4% 7.5%
  • 41-50 9.9% 10.0%
  • 51-100 14.0% 14.2%
  • >100 15.7% 15.0%
  
  

  Fitness Facilities in Community Recreation Tables 3 Variable Sample Fitness Programming
  

  • Number of Full-Time Fitness Staff N= 120
  • None 31.7%
  • 1-2 48.3%
  • 3-5 12.5%
  • 6-8 3.3%
  • 9-11 0.8%
  • >11 3.3%
  
  
  • Number ofPart- Time Fitness Staff 120
  • 1-5 46.7%
  • 6-10 16.7%
  • 11-15 14.2%
  • 16-20 5.0%
  • 21-25 5.8%
  • >25 11.7%
  
  
  • Facility Offers Fitness Equipment N= 143 132
  • Yes 74.8% 81.1%
  • No 25.2% 19.9%
  
  
  • Facility Offers Fitness Programming N= 144 133
  • Yes 86.8% 94.0%
  • No 13.2% 6.0%
  
  
  • Drop-ln Facilities Available N= 143 132
  • Yes 67.1% 72.7%
  • No 32.9% 27.3%
  
  
  • Increase in Capital Outlay for Fitness Services N= 107
  • No increase in last 10 years 32.7%
  • In the last 2 years 43.9%
  • In the last 5 years 22.4%
  • In the last 10 years 0.9%
  
  

  Fitness Facilities in Community Recreation Tables 4

  TABLE 2 Funding Source, Facility Assignment and Staffing Practices Funding Sources

  Variable MuniciDal SDecial Recreation District Other Percentage of Assignable Space
  

  • Dedicated to Fitness Activities N=121
  • Less than 10% 17.5% 5.0% 0.8%
  • 10-25% 15.8% 5.0% 3.3%
  • 25-40% 7.4% 2.5% 1.7%
  • 40-55% 12.5% 0.8% 7.5%
  • more than 55% 13.3% 1.7% 3.3%
  
  
  • Number of Full- Time StaffN=133
  • 1-2 18.1% 3.9% 4.7%
  • 3-5 22.0% 7.1% 0.8%
  • 6-10 15.0% 2.4% 3.1%
  • 11-20 8.7% 1.3% 6.3%
  • >20 4.7% 0.8% 0.8%
  
  
  • Number ofPart- Time StaffN=120
  • Less than 10 19.2% 1.7% 1.7%
  • 10-20 14.2% 4.2% 2.5%
  • 21-30 5.8% 1.7% 2.5%
  • 31-40 6.7% 0.8%
  • 41-50 4.5% 5.0% 0.8%
  • 51-100 7.5% 2.5% 4.2%
  • More than 100 10.8% 4.2%
  
  
  • Number ofFull- Time Fitness StaffN=120
  • None 24.2% 5.0% 2.5%
  • 1-2 28.3% 10.0% 10.0%
  • 3-5 8.3% 0.8% 3.3%
  • More than 5 5.8% 0.8% 0.8%
  
  

  Fitness Facilities in Community Recreation Tables 5

  Variable MuniciDal SDecial Recreation District Other
  

  • Number ofPart- Time Fitness StaffN=120
  • 1-5 37.5% 5.0% 4.2%
  • 6-10 8.3% 5.8% 2.5%
  • 11-15 8.3% 3.3% 2.5%
  • >15 12.5% 2.5% 7.5%
  
  
  • Degree Requirements ofStaffN=112
  • Required of all fitness staff 3.5% 2.7%
  • Required of full-time staff only 22.1% 4.4% 9.7%
  • Staff were grandfathered in 1.8% 0.9%
  • No degree required of fitness staff 38.9% 10.6% 4.4%
  
  
  • Certification Requirements of Staff N= 112
  • All fitness staff must be certified 10.7% 1.8% 1.8%
  • Only certain staff must be certified 33.0% 9.8% 12.5%
  • Required for continuing employment 1.8% 1.8% 0.9%
  • In-house certification required 1.8% 0.9% 1.8%
  • No certification requirements of staff 17.9% 2.7% 0.9%
  
  
  • Familiarity with Fitness Certifications N=122
  • Very familiar 13.1% 5.7% 9.8%
  • Somewhat familiar 19.7% 3.3% 4.1%
  • Familiar, but not with quality 14.8% 4.9% 0.8%
  • Not very familiar 15.6% 2.5% 1.6%
  • Not at all familiar 4.1 %
  
  
  • CPR Certification Requirements N=120
  • All fitness staff must be certified 45.0% 13.3% 10.0%
  • Only full-time staff must be certified 9.2% 2.5% 5.8%
  • No CPR requirement 12.5% 0.8% 0.8%
  
  
  • Increase in Capital Outlay for Fitness Services N= 107
  • No increase in last 10 years 26.2% 2.8% 3.7%
  • In the last 2 years 27.1% 12.1% 4.7%
  • In the last 5 years 12.1% 1.9% 8.4%
  • In the last 10 years 0.9%
  
  

  Fitness Facilities in Community Recreation Tables 6

  TABLE 3 Assignable Space, Facility Assignment and Staffing Practices

  Assignab1e Space in Thousands of Square Feet

  Variable Percentage of Usable Space Variable <20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 >70
  

  • Dedicated to Fitness Activities N=112
  • Less than 10% 12.5% 2.7% 0.9% 2.7% 2.7%
  • 10-25% 12.5% 5.4% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 0.9% 1.7%
  • 25-40% 3.6% 0.9% 1.7% 0.9% 0.9% 3.6%
  • 40-55% 2.7% 1.7% 3.6% 5.4% 2.7% 0.9% 3.6%
  • more than 55% 10.7% 2.7% 0.9% 1.7% 0.9% 2.7%
  
  
  • Number ofFu11- Time StaffN=117
  • 1-2 21.4% 2.6% 0.9% 1.7% 0.9%
  • 3-5 17.1% 6.0% 3.4% 0.9% 0.9% 0.9%
  • 6-10 1.7% 4.3% 0.9% 4.3% 1.7% 2.6% 4.3%
  • 11-20 0.9% 0.9% 4.3% 5.1% 6.0%
  • More than 20 2.6% 0.9% 3.4%
  
  
  • Number of Part-Time StaffN=111
  • Less than 10 18.9% 1.8% 0.9% 0.9%
  • 10-20 9.0% 7.2% 1.8% 0.9% 0.9% 0.9%
  • 21-30 4.5% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8%
  • 31-40 1.8% 1.8% 0.9% 0.9% 0.9%
  • 41-50 3.6% 0.9% 0.9% 2.7% 0.9% 0.9%
  • 51-100 1.8% 0.9% 4.5% 1.8% 0.9% 4.5%
  • More than 100 1.8% 0.9% 0.9% 3.6% 2.7% 0.9% 5.4%
  
  
  • Number ofFu11-Time Fitness StaffN=110
  • None 21.8% 4.5% 1.8% 2.7% 0.9%
  • 1-2 14.5% 5.5% 6.4% 9.1% 5.5% 2.7% 4.5%
  • 3-5 1.8% 2.7% 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 3.6%
  • More than 5 2.7% 5.5%
  
  

  Fitness Facilities in Community Recreation Tables 7

  Variable <20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 >70
  

  • Number of Part-Time Fitness StaffN=110
  • 1-5 25.4% 9.1% 1.8% 1.8% 3.6% 0.9% 2.7%
  • 6-10 6.4% 0.9% 0.9% 2.7% 0.9% 3.6%
  • 11-15 4.5% 2.7% 2.7% 1.8% 2.7%
  • More than 15 5.5% 1.8% 4.5% 4.5% 2.7% 5.5%
  
  
  • Degree Requirements of Staff N= 103
  • Required of all fitness staff 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 2.9%
  • Required of full-time staff only 7.8% 4.9% 4.9% 6.8% 4.9% 1.0% 8.7%
  • Staff were grandfathered in 1.9% 1.0%
  • No degree required of fitness staff 31.1% 7.8% 2.9% 3.9% 1.9% 3.9%
  
  
  • Certification Requirements ofStaffN=103
  • All fitness staff must be certified 5.8% 1.0% 1.0% 6.8%
  • Only certain staff must be certified 20.4% 6.8% 6.8% 7.8% 6.8% 3.9% 4.9%
  • Required for continuing employment 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.9%
  • In-house certification required 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
  • No certification requirements of staff 12.6% 3.9% 1.0% 1.9% 1.0%
  
  
  • Familiarity with Fitness Certifications N=112
  • Very familiar 8.0% 0.9% 1.8% 4.5% 2.7% 2.7% 8.9%
  • Somewhat familiar 12.5% 2.7% 3.6% 3.6% 2.7% 0.9% 2.7%
  • Familiar, but not with quality 6.3% 2.7% 1.8% 0.9% 1.8% 2.7%
  • Not very familiar 12.5% 4.5% 2.7% 1.8%
  • Not at all familiar 2.7% 1.8%
  
  
  • CPR Certification Requirements N=110
  • All fitness staff must be certified 25.5% 8.2% 6.4% 6.4% 6.4% 3.6% 11.8%
  • On1y full-time staff must be certified 6.4% 3.6% 0.9% 3.6% 0.9% 1.8%
  • No CPR Requirement 10.0% 0.9% 1.8% 0.9% 0.9%
  
  

  Fitness Facilities in Community Recreation Tables 8

  TABLE 4 Percent of Assignable Space Used for Fitness Services, Facility Assignment and Staffing Practices Percent of Assignable Space Variable <10 10-25 25-40 40-55 >55
  

  • Number of Full- Time StaffN=118
  • 1-2 8.5% 6.8% 4.2% 5.9%
  • 3-5 6.8% 6.8% 4.2% 4.2% 0.8%
  • 6-10 5.1% 5.1% 2.5% 5.1% 0.8%
  • 11-20 1.7% 2.5% 3.4% 5.9%
  • More than 20 2.5% 1.7% 0.8% 1.7%
  
  
  • Number ofPart- Time StaffN=120
  • Less than 10 7.5% 6.7% 2.5% 1.7% 3.3%
  • 10-20 5.0% 7.5% 5.0% 3.3%
  • 21-30 2.5% 2.5% 0.8% 1.7% 2.5%
  • 31-40 0.8% 1.7% 0.8% 1.7% 2.5%
  • 41-50 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 1.7% 2.5%
  • 51-100 3.3% 1.7% 3.3% 5.0% 0.8%
  • More than 100 3.3% 1.7% 2.5% 4.2% 3.3%
  
  
  • Number of Full- Time Fitness StaffN=119
  • None 16.8% 4.2% 3.4% 3.4% 4.2%
  • 1-2 7.6% 14.3% 4.2% 13.4% 7.6%
  • 3-5 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 4.2%
  • More than 5 2.5% 0.8% 1.7% 2.5%
  
  

  Fitness Facilities in Community Recreation Tables 9 Variable <10 10-25 25-40 40-55 >55
  

  • Number ofPart- Time Fitness StaffN=118
  • 1-5 18.6% 11.0% 3.4% 6.8% 6.8%
  • 6-10 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 3.4% 4.2%
  • 11-15 1.7% 5.9% 1.7% 3.4% 1.7%
  • More than 15 0.8% 3.4% 2.5% 7.6% 5.9%
  
  
  • Degree Requirements ofStaff N=110
  • Required of all fitness staff 1.8% 1.8% 0.9% 1.8%
  • Requiredoffull-timestaffonly 3.6% 11.8% 5.5% 10.9% 5.5%
  • Staff were grandfathered in 0.9% 1.8%
  • No degree required of fitness staff 17.3% 8.2% 6.4% 10.0% 10.0%
  
  
  • Certification Requirements ofStaff N=109
  • All fitness staff must be certified 2.8% 2.8% 2.8% 2.8% 3.7%
  • Only certain staff must be certified 9.2% 14.7% 7.3% 14.7% 9.2%
  • Required for continuing employment 1.9% 2.8%
  • In-house certification required 1.9% 0.9% 0.9% .
  • No certification requirements of staff 9.2% 4.6% 0.9% 4.6% 2.8%
  
  
  • Familiarity with Fitness Certifications N=119
  • Very familiar 4.2% 3.4% 3.4% 9.2% 7.6%
  • Somewhat familiar 4.2% 8.4% 3.4% 5.9% 5.9%
  • Familiar, but not with quality 5.0% 3.4% 4.2% 4.2% 3.4%
  • Not very familiar 8.4% 7.6% 0.9% 1.7% 1.7%
  • Not at all familiar 2.5% 1.7%

    Table 9 Topical Classification Area Percentile Ranks
    CPR Certification Requirements N=116
    Classification	<10	10-25	25-40	40-55	>55
    All Staff	13.8%	17.2%	7.8	15.5%	13.8%
    Full-Time Only	4.3%	4.3%	2.6%	4.3%	1.7%
    NO CPR Required	6.0%	1.7%	1.7%	1.7%	3.4%

    Table 9 Topical Classification Area Percentile Ranks
    Increase in Capital Outlay for Fitness Services N=105
    Classification	<10	10-25	25-40	40-55	>55
    No Increase	11.4%	7.6%	1.99	6.7%	5.7%
    Last 2 Years	8.6%	11.4%	3.8%	7.6%	11.4%
    Last 5 Years	1.9%	2.9%	4.8%	7.6%	3.8%
    Last 10 Years	1.0%	0	0	0	0

    The Growth in Central City and Suburban Municipal Recreation Land

    A. J. Haley
    Department of Recreation Management and Tourism
    Arizona State University - Main
    P.O. Box 874905
    Tempe, AZ 85287-4905
    Work: 602-965-3012
    Home: 602- 829-8051
    FAX: 602-965-5664
    

    Tim Snaith
    Faculty of Leisure and Environmental Management
    The Buckinghamshire College
    Wellesbourne Campus, Kingshill Road
    High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire HP13 588
    Work: 441-494-522-141
    Home: 441-494-452-711
    FAX: 441-494-524-392
    

    Accepted: September, 2004

    Abstract:

    This comparison article expands and completes an earlier nationwide assessment of the comparative relationship of central city and suburban municipal recreation land in the United States that appeared in Volume 15, November 1 of this journal (Haley & Snaith, 1996). By reapplying the traditional recreation land percentage standard of 10% to these municipal situations, a longitudinal research base is established that advances and amplifies the earlier article and makes it possible to more positively describe within a longitudinal and historical framework, the central city and suburban municipal recreation land situation. Key research results reveal the entire tri-level municipal recreation land situation to have experienced real growth over the study's 15 year period, with the central cities' allocative advantage over the suburbs in the category of percentage of total municipal land in recreation holdings narrowed by 1 percent to 2.3 percent.

    Key Words:
    

    Central city, longitudinal, municipal recreation land, nationwide, standard, suburban.

    The Growth in Central City and Suburban Municipal Recreation Land

    The purpose of this companion study is to expand and complete an earlier comparative, baseline study of municipal recreation land in the United States that appeared in this journal (Haley & Snaith, 1996) last year. This documentation will be effected by application of the traditional and benchmark recreation land percentage (10%) standard to the study's 152 constituent and paired central cities and suburbs. As recently noted by Ammons (1996) in attempting

    To determine whether a municipality's performance is favorable or unfavorable, it is necessary to compare that jurisdiction's performance marks against some relevant peg. Among city governments that monitor their own performance, many compare current performance with figures for the same measures in previous reporting periods. Some compare the performance measures of different units in the same jurisdiction providing similar services or compare performance records with predetermined targets. Until recently, relatively few have used national or state standards, private sector performance, or the performance records of other jurisdictions as benchmarks for gauging their own jurisdiction's performance (Hatry, 1980).

    It is precisely the application of the recreation land percentage standard that allows for the forming of a quantitative base from which a central city-suburban longitudinal comparison can be accomplished.

    Ever since the formation of the Playground Association of America (P.A.A.), municipal recreation and park professionals in the United States have been concerned with the concept of standards. At its formation ninety years ago the P.A.A. adopted the following resolution:

    That while there is no inherent relation between space and children, and the exact amount of space required cannot be determined, it is our belief that the present London requirement of 30 square feet of playground for each child of the school is the minimum with which the proper amount of light, air and space for play and gymnastics can be secured (Gold, 1973:2).

    As noted in the National Recreation and Park Association's (N.R.P.A.) 1983 publication entitled, Recreation, Park and Open Space Standards and Guidelines, early work by the P.A.A. for the metropolitan area of Washington, D.C., also led to the development of the standard of at least one acre of playground for each 2,000 students in a school district. In this same publication the NRPA further notes that during the 1930's, relative to further standards development, the National Recreation Association (N.R.A.) conducted the first large, 5,000 respondents, recreation preference survey in the United States.

    The N.R.A.'s interest in standards development was further evinced by its nationwide publication and promulgation of George Butlers's standard of 10 acres of park and open space per 1,000 urban population in the 1940's and 50's. Since then five major, national-level meetings/studies on the part of the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission (O.R.R.R.C.), the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation (B.O.R.) and the N.R.P.A. have provided endorsements of Butlers's standard, the presently utilized 10 percent of area standard, and a wide variety of other standards generally categorized as Nequality techniquesO. These techniques are based on the belief that local recreation services should be equally provided to all residents.

    It has been noted (Van Doren, et al., 1983:56) that:

    Standards - commonly based upon population density - provide the basic measure for the equality technique to determine local recreation needs. No general provision is made in any space or facility standard for adapting practice or priority because of presence or absence of any other factor included in a broad community survey. The primary virtue of this tradition appears to be that the equal distribution of recreation resources based on the distribution of population is easy to compute and, more appealingly, easy to interpret, defend, and sell. Historically, when local needs were locally determined and responded to by mobilizing local resources via the public purse, these last-mentioned attributes were of enormous consequence. They should not be understated today.

    The 10% standard is utilized in this study for both the reasons stated above, and the fact that it is one of the few quantitative measures in recreation which can be related to the past, present, and future.

    By collecting follow-up data for 1970 and 1985 on the originally paired central cities and suburbs, this article partially redresses the overriding lack of municipal recreation research by contributing to the development of a special theory applicable to a limited conceptual range - the central city/suburban municipal recreation relationship. Such theory attempts, Nto consolidate, not fragment, empirical findingsO (Merton, 1968:65). As a theory of the middle-range this descriptive research endeavors to specify and delimit municipal recreation within the context of the interrelationship of central cities and suburbs. As such, it is in agreement with Robert Nisbet's statement, Nthat what is primary..is what's out thereO (Cosner, 1975:9).

    Due to the difficulty involved in obtaining municipal recreation administration data on a nationwide basis researchers have not attempted to document the relationship between central city and suburban municipal recreation administration. Several researchers have suggested certain central city-suburban municipal recreation relationships. Some (Whyte, 1956; Gottman, 1961; Gans, 1967; Sobin,1971) suggested that the distribution of municipal recreation opportunities was skewed toward the central cities. These observations on the central city-suburban municipal recreation relationship were mere conjecture, and not based upon any quantitative treatment of available municipal recreation data.

    Some of the reasons for such an omission are: a lack of reliable municipal recreation baseline data, lack of adequate research sponsorship, fragmented and isolated research efforts, lack of tradition, and the dominance of the profession by outdoor recreation monies, interests and researchers. Indeed, municipal recreation literature has virtually ignored the entire suburban scene, although the arrival of the suburban era in the United States has been statistically confirmed and accepted as a given by urban researchers. In 1960 the total number of suburbanites was approximately 50 million; by 1965 it was more than 60 million; and by 1970 the number was 75.6 million. Of the total U.S. population in 1975, 29.2 percent lived inside the central cities, while 39.9 percent lived in suburban areas. In the five year period from 1970 to 1975 the suburbs residential population grew by 9.3 percent and, for the first time in the history of the world, a nation-state counted more suburbanites than city dwellers or farmers (Jackson, 1985). This explosive suburban growth makes it all the more important that the suburban municipal recreation land situation be longitudinally investigated and documented.

    Original design of the study - 1965 data

    In order to obtain the necessary data for the 1965 segment of the original comparative study, the Recreation and Park Yearbook ( National Recreation and Park Association, 1967), The Municipal Year Book (International City Management Association, 1963-67), and The County and City Data Book, 1967 (Bureau of the Census) were utilized.

    The Bureau of the Census identified 224 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (S.M.S.A.'s) in the United States as of December 31, 1965. Thus the original investigative boundaries of this study were set at an assessment of the largest central city and one of its selected contiguous suburbs in each of the 224 S.M.S.A.'s in the United States. If the largest central city had incomplete municipal recreation data, then the next largest central city within the S.M.S.A. was chosen. This process was continued until an appropriately qualified central city was found or the entire number of designated central cities within the S.M.S.A. was exhausted.

    A complete investigation of these 224 S.M.S.A.'s revealed there were 106 central cities that had reported municipal recreation administration data in the Recreation and Park Yearbook, the remaining 118 S.M.S.A.'s were rejected because of a lack of such data. Further investigation showed, however, that twenty of these 106 central cities had incomplete data on municipal recreation operating expenditures. Thus, they too were rejected for consideration.

    This left eighty-six central cities available for investigation. This number was further reduced when the random selection of the suburb to be include with each central city was determined. By examining the 897 suburbs listed in the NFunctional Classification of CitiesO of the Municipal Year Book, 1966, ten additional central cities were deleted since there was no suburb within their respective S.M.S.A.'s with the data necessary to develop figures for the three standardized categories. Consequently, there remained seventy-six paired central cities and suburbs with the complete municipal recreation information needed to form the original base and parameters for this longitudinal investigation.

    1970 and 1985 Data

    Each of the originally selected central cities and suburbs was personally contacted and inventoried by the authors for the 1970 and 1985 municipal recreation data. In gathering this data, a hundred percent follow-up response was accomplished over a period of more than three years in order to continue the on-going provision of a historical and substantive descriptive rendering of the central city and suburban municipal recreation situation during the most intense period of suburbanization in the history of the United States.

    All of the collected data came directly from the major municipal recreation agencies in each of the 152 studied municipalities. These agencies provided data reflective of their operations, and also contributed to the study by identifying other local agencies that were delivering significant municipal recreation services. Municipal recreation land information was acquired on the total recreation and park acreage under the direct domain of the reporting municipal recreation administrative unit (school recreation acreage, open spaces, green belts, parkways, etc, when appropriate, were included).

    Listed in Table 1 are the investigated central cities and suburbs. A central city is the largest city of an S.M.S.A. which give the S.M.S.A. its name, while a suburb is Nan incorporated residential area outside the existing political boundaries of the central cityO (Gold, 1973). There is a total of seventy-six pairings, each representing a separate S.M.S.A.. The pairings are presented by state in alphabetical order. In each paring the central city appears first. TABLE 1

    PAIRED CENTRAL CITIES AND SUBURBS

    Municipality	State	Municipality	State
    Mobile	Alabama	Stamford	Connecticut
    Chickasaw	Alabama	Darien	Connecticut
    Birmingham	Alabama	Washington	D.C.
    Mountain Brook	Alabama	Fairfax	Virginia
    Phoenix	Arizona	West Palm Beach	Florida
    Tempe	Arizona	Riviera Beach	Florida
    San Diego	California	Miami	Florida
    Oceanside	California	Coral Gables	Florida
    Stockton	California	Tampa	Florida
    Lodi	California	Clearwater	Florida
    Riverside	California	Jacksonville	Florida
    Redlands	California	Jacksonville Beach	Florida
    Los Angeles	California	Augusta	Georgia
    Montebello	California	Aiken	South Carolina
    Sacramento	California	Atlanta	Georgia
    Roseville	California	Marietta	Georgia
    San Francisco	California	Columbus	Georgia
    Alameda	California	Phenix City	Alabama
    Santa Barbara	California	Champaign	Illinois
    Lompoc	California	Rantoul	Illinois
    Vallejo	California	Chicago	Illinois
    Fairfield	California	Park Forest	Illinois
    Oxnard	California	Indianapolis	Indiana
    Santa Paula	California	Shelbyville	Indiana
    Anaheim	California	Davenport	Iowa
    Costa Mesa	California	Bettendorf	Iowa
    San Jose	California	Waterloo	Iowa
    Sunnyvale	California	Cedar Falls	Iowa
    Hartford	Connecticut	Evansville	Indiana
    East Hartford	Connecticut	Henderson	Kentucky
    Waterbury	Connecticut	Baltimore	Maryland
    Watertown	Connecticut	Annapolis	Maryland
    Worcester	Massachusetts	Buffalo	New York
    Shrewsbury	Massachusetts	Lancaster	New York
    Boston	Massachusetts	New York City	New York
    Braintree	Massachusetts	Hempstead	New York
    Chicopee	Massachusetts	Syracuse	New York
    Northampton	Massachusetts	Oswego	New York
    Lowell	Massachusetts	Troy	New York
    Billerica	Massachusetts	Saratoga Springs	New York
    Lansing	Michigan	Cincinnati	Ohio
    East Lansing	Michigan	Covington	Kentucky
    Ann Arbor	Michigan	Columbus	Ohio
    Ypsilanti	Michigan	Bexley	Ohio
    Grand Rapids	Michigan	Akron	Ohio
    Grand Haven	Michigan	Barberton	Ohio
    Detroit	Michigan	Dayton	Ohio
    Wayne	Michigan	Fairborn	Ohio
    Duluth	Minnesota	Toledo	Ohio
    Virginia	Minnesota	Oregon	Ohio
    Minneapolis	Minnesota	Cleveland	Ohio
    Coon Rapids	Minnesota	Bedford	Ohio
    St. Louis	Missouri	Youngstown	Ohio
    Alton	Illinois	Campbell	Ohio
    Omaha	Nebraska	Portland	Oregon
    Council Bluffs	Iowa	Vancouver	Washington
    Las Vegas	Nevada	Eugene	Oregon
    Henderson	Nevada	Springfield	Oregon
    Trenton	New Jersey	Lancaster	Pennsylvania
    Princeton	New Jersey	Columbia	Pennsylvania
    Jersey City	New Jersey	Philadelphia	Pennsylvania
    West New York	New Jersey	Phoenixville	Pennsylvania
    Paterson	New Jersey	Pittsburgh	Pennsylvania
    New Milford	New Jersey	Hempfield	Pennsylvania
    Rochester	New York	Wilkes-Barre	Pennsylvania
    Newark	New York	Nanticoke	Pennsylvania
    Providence	Rhode Island	Norfolk	Virginia
    Cranston	Rhode Island	Virginia Beach	Virginia
    Knoxville	Tennessee	Wheeling	West Virginia
    Oak Ridge	Tennessee	Moundsville	West Virginia
    Port Arthur	Texas	Charleston	West Virginia
    Orange	Texas	Dunbar	West Virginia
    Dallas	Texas	Green Bay	Wisconsin
    Grand Prairie	Texas	DePere	Wisconsin
    Fort Worth	Texas	Milwaukee	Wisconsin
    White Settlement	Texas	Brookfield	Wisconsin

    Municipal recreation land 1970

    The seventy-six central cities averaged 6.4 percent of their municipal recreation land in recreation; the seventy-six suburbs 3.1 percent. Fifteen central cities (Table 2) attained the traditional land standard of 10 percent. Only three suburbs (Table 3) attained this standard.

    CENTRAL CITIES ATTAINING THE STANDARD OF 10% OF THEIR TOTAL LAND IN MUNICIPAL RECREATION

    TABLE 2
    1970	% of Land	1985	% of Land
    Hartford - Connecticut	19.8	Wheeling - West Virginia	22.8
    New York City - New York	19.5	Dallas - Texas	22.2
    Wheeling - West Virginia	18.8	San Diego - California	20.7
    Youngstown - Ohio	17.1	Hartford - Connecticut	19.3
    Duluth - Minnesota	16.6	New York City - New York	18.5
    Minneapolis - Minnesota	15.0	Minneapolis - Minnesota	18.1
    San Diego - California	13.6	Duluth - Minnesota	16.6
    Portland - Oregon	13.0	Youngstown - Ohio	15.3
    Philadelphia - Pennsylvania	12.3	Rochester - New York	13.9
    Phoenix - Arizona	12.2	Baltimore - Maryland	12.2
    Rochester - New York	12.0	Portland - Oregon	11.9
    Baltimore - Maryland	11.8	Phoenix - Arizona	11.6
    Champaign - Illinois	11.3	Ann Arbor - Michigan	11.2
    Dallas - Texas	10.6	Omaha - Nebraska	11.2
    Ann Arbor - Michigan	10.0	Lansing - Michigan	11.1

    In 1985, the seventy-six central cities averaged 6.7 percent of their municipal land in recreation; the seventy-six suburbs averaged 4.4 percent. Fifteen central cities (Table 2) attained the traditional land standard of 10 percent. Eight suburbs (Table 3) attained this standard.

    TABLE 3
    SUBURBS ATTAINING THE STANDARD OF 10% OF THEIR TOTAL LAND IN MUNICIPAL RECREATION
    1970	% of Land	1985	% of Land
    Princeton - New Jersey	24.3	Lancaster - Pennsylvania	26.0
    Vancouver - Washington	13.2	Dunbar - West Virginia	23.1
    Covington - Kentucky	11.3	Vancouver - Washington	20.7
    Princeton - New Jersey	16.5
    Yipsilanti - Michigan	13.4
    Park Forest - Illinois	13.1
    Marietta - Georgia	12.5
    Alton - Illinois	10.9

    Summary

    Percent of land in recreation

    In sum, this study has documented real growth in the municipal recreation land situation between 1970 and 1985. As delineated in Tables 2 and 3, between 1970 and 1985 the central cities' allocative advantage over the suburbs in the category of percentage of total municipal land in recreation holdings was narrowed. Over these fifteen years the central cities' percentage of total land in municipal recreation increased from 6.4 to 6.7 percent, while the suburban level increased from 3.1 to 4.4 percent. Consequently, the overall municipalities' average rose from 4.8 to 5.5 percent of land in municipal recreation holdings.

    In 1970 15.8 percent of the central cities, averaging 14.2 percent, attained the standard of 10 percent of their total land in municipal recreation holdings; in 1985, once again, 15.8 percent of the central cities, averaging 15.8 percent, attained this standard. Only 3.9 percent of the suburbs in 1970, averaging 16.3 percent, attained the standard of having 10 percent of their total land in municipal recreation holdings; 10.1 percent of these suburbs in 1985, averaging 17 percent, attained this standard.

    REFERENCES

    • AMMONS, D. (1996). Municipal Benchmarks: Assessing Local Performance and Establishing Community Standards, Thousand Oaks, Cal: Sage Publications.
    • BARTHOLOMEW, H. (1955). Land Uses in American Cities, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 66-67.
    • Bureau of the Census, (1967). County and City Data Book, Washington, D.C., United States Department of Commerce.
    • COSER, L. (1975). The Idea of Social Structure, New-York: Harcourt Brace Jovanich, Inc., p.9.
    • GANS, H. (1967). An Anatomy of Suburbia, New Society, 10, 423-431.
    • GOLD, S. (1973). Urban Recreation Planning, Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger.
    • GOTTMAN, J. (1961). Megalopolis: The Urbanized Northeastern Seaboard of the United States, New-York: Twentieth Century Fund.
    • HALEY, A. & SNAITH, T. (1996). A Longitudinal Review and Update of Municipal Recreation Land in the United States: The Central City/Suburban Situation, Journal of Recreation and Leisure, Volume 15, Number 1.
    • HALEY, A. (1985). Municipal Recreation Land Allocations in the United States: A Longitudinal Review of the Central City/Suburban Situation, Society and Leisure, 8(1), 187-201.
    • JACKSON, K. (1985). Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States, New York: Oxford University Press, 283-284.
    • LANDCASTER, R. (1983). Recreation, Park and Open Space Standards and Guidelines, Alexandria VA: National Recreation and Park Association.
    • MERTON, R. (1968). Social Theory and Social Structure, New-York: The Free Press, p. 65.
    • National Recreation and Park Association (1967). Recreation and Park Yearbook, 1966, Washington, D.C. McGregor and Werner, 44-160.
    • NOLTING, O. and ARNOLD, D. (Eds.) (1967). The Municipal Year Book, Chicago: The International City Management Association.
    • SOBIN, D. (1971). The Future of the American Suburbs, Port Washington: Kenikat Press.

    ---

    ---

    ---

    The Model Development:

    Strategies for Aquatic Management

    
    
    

    Richard Hsiao

    The Florida State University

    Sheng-Wen Wang

    Dohan insttitute of Technology Hualian Taiwan

    Jin-Long Chen

    The Florida State University

    Jae-Hyun Ha

    The Florida State University

    
    
    
    
    

    Contact:Richard Hsiao, ABD

    Associate Professor

    The Flordia State University

    Department of Sport Management, Recreation Management and Physical Education

    200 Tully Gym

    Tallahassee, Florda 32306

    (850) 212-2950

    Accepted: October 1, 2005

    ---

    Abstract
    

    Is aquatic facility management risky? Some statistics from various sources may be surprising: According to Fawcett's research (2001 ), his study pointed out that less than 20 percent of aquatic directors hold the required aquatic-related certifications and 28.8 percent of the aquatic directors reported no prior aquatic experience before working in aquatic management.

    Aquatic liability is approaching a paradigm shift, making it necessary for aquatic professionals employed at all levels to have knowledge about the principles of risk management (Fletemeyer, 2003). The purpose of this study was to develop the "best-fit" risk management model for application in aquatic facilities. A review of court cases from the Westlaw legal search system and other literature review were completed in order to provide cutting edge information for aquatic facility management. The researcher also examined and analyzed various risk management models. Some of the risk management models included in the study were: the "IEC" risk management system (Clement, 2004), the integrated approach risk management model (Australian Sports Commission, 1999) and the "ECT" model (Fried, 1999), etc.

    The researcher's long-term goal and plans for future study include the development of a risk management manual for aquatic facilities based on the "best-fit" model. Today, it is almost impossible to provide a "risk-free" aquatic environment, however the researcher will attempt to assist aquatic facilities in understanding and applying the "best-fit" model which will provide techniques for aquatic directors in how to reduce potential risks in aquatic facilities, which in hopes will ultimately decrease the occurrence of swimming-related accidents.

    INTRODUCTION

    Swimming is the second most popular exercise in the United States with approximately 400 million pool visits annually (US Bureau of the Census, 1995). According to the National Spa & Pool Institute (NSPI, 2003), the world's largest organization for the pool and hot tub industry, the installation and construction of all pools and hot tubs nationally, in 2001, resulted in more than $6.6 billion in sales revenue. The results of this economic impact mean increased awareness for the industry and also increased risk awareness for the safety of swimming pools nationwide. The NSPI estimates that there are 3.3 million in-ground swimming pools, 3.2 million above-ground pools, and 3.2 million spa/hot tubs in the United States. The foregoing data clearly demonstrates the popularity of swimming-activity in the United States. Despite the reported high level of participation in aquatic activities and the many pools and spas in the United States, Terri Simmons, editor of Aquatic International, quoted Sam Frees in a 1994 editorial stating that less than 40% of all Americans consider themselves swimmers. According to Frees, President of the International Swimming Hall of Fame of Fort Lauderdale, this is a radical change from 1949, when 66% of the United States population considered themselves swimmers. United States Swimming concurs with Frees, stating that more than half of all residents of the United States cannot swim and woqld not survive if thrown into deep water (Clement, 1998). The United States Water Fitness Association estimates that less than 5% of Americans can swim 500 yards or more without stopping (Spannuth, 2001).

    THE PURPOSE OF STUDY

    The purpose of this study was to develop a "best-fit" model for aquatic risk management based on relevant literature review, a review of American law cases, and an examination of various existing risk management models.

    REVIEW OF LITERATURE

    The following literature review provides some statistics and an in-depth analysis of the aquatic accidents/incidents.

    Sports and activities that take place on water are usually considered high-risk. Aquatic professionals need to be aware of accident and fatality rates in sport and physical activity in general as well as in aquatic activities. Also, they must recognize that as the number of serious injuries increases, the potential for lawsuits also increases (Clement, 1997).

    Each year, approximately, 6,000 persons in the United States are victims of drowning and nearly 70 % of drowning victims are over 20 years of age. Drowning has always been a concern in swimming facilities. Drowning is second only to motor vehicle accidents as a cause of accidental death in adults aged 20 to 44 years (American Family Physician, 1989). For children, water was even more deadly- it ranked as the second most common cause of accidental death. There are currently over 220,000 young people between the ages of 8 and 18 enrolled in the United States Swimming (USS) competitive age group program, as well as hundreds of thousands more participating in similar programs through a variety of local organizations, including YMCAs, Jewish community centers, and country clubs (Gale Encyclopedia of Childhood & Adolescence, 1998). Every year, drowning takes the lives of approximately 600 children in the United States under the age of 5 and about 220 children between the ages of 5 to 9 and about one fourth of the older children who drown know how to swim (Gale Encyclopedia of Childhood & Adolescence, 1998).

    According to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission's NEISS (2003), 27% of all swimming pool injuries and 33% of all diving board injuries treated in 2002 occurred to children between 10 and 14 years of age. Of the reported injuries associated with swimming pool slides, 37% occurred to children between five and nine years of age. Males accounted for 63 % of these swimming pool injuries with 72 % being diving board injuries, and 56 % related to swimming-pool slides. These victims were most often transported to the hospital emergency room where they were treated most commonly for lacerations to the face and head and then thereafter, released. It is important to note, however, that these figures do not reflect injuries treated at lifeguard stations, at home, in doctors' offices, health clinics, or after direct hospital admission.

    Clement (2001) reviewed all aquatic incidents in court decisions reported in LexisINexis Universe among children from birth to 15 years of age, between 1990 and 1999. She found a fluctuation in the number of cases for various age groups, with a pattern of more cases involving very young children and those children 12 to 15 years old. A consistent pattern for males and females was found through age nine. The very largest discrepancy between males and females was in the 14-to-15 year-old age group. The majority of these incidents occurred in swimming pools. Clement's data also indicated that males (89 cases) had roughly twice the water-accident rate of females ( 43 cases).

    Table .1 shows the distribution of children's water accidents by age.

    Table 1 Water Accidents by Age and Location
    Age									Cases	Male	Female	Accident	Header	Drown	Pool	Outdoors
    2									18/20	12	8	20	0	14	15	3
    3									6	3	3	6	0	6	3	3
    4									11	9	2	11	0	8	8	0
    5									7/8	5	3	7	1	5	0	0
    6									11	8	3	11	0	7	9	1
    7									4	3	1	4	0	4	2	2
    8									3	3	0	3	0	3	3	0
    9									10	5	5	9	1	6	0	0
    10									9	7	2	4	5	5	0	0
    11									8	5	3	7	1	6	0	0
    12									9	6	3	7	2	0	5	2
    13									11	6	5	7	4	0	0	0
    14									11	8	3	3	8	3	0	0
    15									11	9	2	3	8	3	0	0

    Note: "Children and Water Injuries"
    by A. Clement, 2001, Children and Injuries, p352. Copyright 2001 by Lawyers & Judges Publishing Company, Inc. Adapted with permission of the author.

    Many accidents at aquatic facilities are unforeseeable, and no matter what age group is involved or how hard the efforts of the staff, patrons will still be at risk for injuries at aquatic facilities. Since elimination of all injuries at aquatic facilities is impossible, the key to reducing exposure to risk is to minimize the number of preventable injuries and diminish the severity of the accidents that do occur. Today, managers ofmost institutions realize how important risk management practice is, but encounter difficulties in putting such policies into practice. Typical difficulties include, but are not limited to, old aquatic facilities, lack of knowledge from professionals, the absence of a risk management plan, and 3:ll inexperienced staff.

    The major finding from Fawcett's (2001) research was that less than 20% of the aquatic directors hold certifications, such as CPO (Certified Pool Operator), AFO (Aquatic Facility Operator), CPR, First Aid, or Lifeguard training and about 28.8% of the aquatic directors reported no prior aquatic experience before working in aquatic management. Only 10.6% of aquatic directors have the certifications listed above and almost 11% of these aquatic directors reported no certifications at all. If an aquatic director wishes to work in the aquatic field, he or she must take responsibility for acquiring the necessary training, such as lifeguard training and aquatic management skills. All facility management personnel should also do what is necessary to remain current in the aquatic profession.

    Aquatic directors must be aware of safety and legal issues that surround what appears to be a harmless activity, but this does not shield them from lawsuits. To succeed, aquatic directors must always be mindful of environmental safety, facility management and potential risks, while regularly examining their facilities. The implementation of risk management processes in the aquatic environment will reduce the risks and provide the most reasonable solutions for constantly emerging problems.

    A good safety and risk management program is good public policy. Risk management should be part of the training of each employee in the recreation and sports work environment. This section will address the definitions of risk management and the importance of risk management.

    Definitions of risk management

    In the area of sports, companies can protect their financial stability and ability to provide services by identifying risks and implementing an action plan to address these risks. Because risk is inherent in most productive activities, even the most conscientious efforts cannot eliminate all risk; reasonable efforts can, however, help companies avoid or reduce the impact of risk on their operations. By including risk management in its strategic planning process, a company can also plan safely to expand into service areas that it might otherwise avoid.

    Risk management has been described in a sport context as responsibility for identifying and determining which methods to employ against potential threats that may negatively affect the sport event (Graham, Goldblatt, & Delpy, 1995). Risk management in sport programs focuses on potential losses wherein all sources of risks are considered. It involves systematically analyzing the services offered in order to determine those that have the potential to cause personal injuries and financial losses. Evaluation is then conducted to select approaches to handling such losses (van der Smissen, 1990). Risk management is the identification, evaluation and control of loss to property, clients, employees and the public (Clement, 1988,1998 & 2004). It is a proactive approach designed to reduce the risk of injuries. Aquatic directors should be mindful of risk management strategies in order to prevent or reduce the number ofunpredicted accidents, liability, and lawsuits associated with aquatics.

    The importance of risk management

    Why is risk management a very important component of aquatic management? Two keys to effective risk management are the identification of risks and the development of strategies to reduce the risk of injury and financial losses. On the other hand, the primary objective ofreduction, to be aware ofloss potential and to do something to reduce that potential, cannot be met with inadequate risk identification. Aquatic managers need to pay particular attention to the identification of risk in the management of human resources while devising strategies to control the risk. Applying risk management means adopting a systematic approach to how professionals view the environment, while identifying issues that face them and developing strategies to address significant risks. Not all risks are significant; however, the relevance and nature of risks can and do change. Risk management helps professionals identify important risks, determine how they should address these risks, and determine how best to allocate resources in relation to these risks.

    REVIEW OF COURT CASES

    In order to understand the importance of risk management practice in aquatic facilities, this part of the literature review will examine court cases. For purposes of this research, Westlaw (2003) legal search engine was used to obtain cases settled by a court of law in the United States in order to highlight potential risk issues in the management of aquatic facilities.

    The following cases will provide a picture ofhow potential risk will harm aquatic programs and facilities as well as re-emphasize the importance of risk management and legal considerations. Most of these cases were direct results ofnegligence, inexperienced staff, lack of training, and poorly organized aquatic classes.

    Negligence and Liability

    Negligent conduct and, thus, liabilityoccurs when an individual or entity creates unreasonable risk of harm to another individual. Negligence can also be defined, according to Black's Law Dictionary (Garner, 2000), as the quality or state ofbeing legally obligated or accountable, or legally responsible to another or to society. In Walker, et al. v. Daniels, et al. (1991), the surviving parents ofa student who drowned at a university swimming pool instituted a wrongful death action against the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia and several ofits agents and employees. During this incident, lifeguard McDonald was posted in a stationary position on an elevated chair. His area of responsibility was the deep end of the pool. Another lifeguard, Holley, was posted at the shallow end of the pool but also should have been roving. Holley was, however, inattentive; he was grabbing and touching female swimmers and generally engaging in horseplay. McDonald left his position and walked to the shallow end of the pool to ask Holley to change places with him because Holley was not fulfilling his responsibilities where he was. McDonald then walked back to his chair, but on the way received word that a body had been discovered at the bottom of the pool. The Supreme Court entered a judgment on the jury verdict in favor of plaintiffs, for $1,500,000, against all defendants.

    The defendants appealed and, ultimately, the Court of Appeals held that: (1) neither the professor ofhealth and physical education nor the director of campus safety breached any duty of care toward the student that could be found to be a proximate cause of his death; (2) jury questions were presented as to whether the lifeguard was inattentive and negligent at the time of the student's death; (3) jury questions were presented as to whether the negligence of the lifeguard was a proximate cause of death; and (4) jury questions were presented as to whether the student was conscious at any point between blunt trauma injury, which caused him to drown, and his death, so as to support a pain and suffering award. The trial court charged that pain and suffering was a legal item of damages; that the questions ofwhether, how much, and how long the plaintiff suffered was for the jury to decide; and that the measure of damages was the enlightened consciences of fair and impartial jurors. Eventually, appellants argued that there was no evidence that the decedent was conscious at any point between the blunt trauma injury which caused him to drown. The appellees' expert witness testified that a wet drowning, i.e., water in the lungs, indicates that the person was conscious as he or she was inhaling water into the lungs, although on cross-examination the witness did state that it was possible that an unconscious person could continue to breathe underwater. Under this evidence, questions concerning the decedent's pain and suffering were for the jury to decide. The charge was not given in error. The judgment was affinlled as to lifeguard Holley and the school board and reversed as to campus safety director Brant and Coach Walker .

    In aquatics, if aquatic directors do not carefully implement risk management, they may be responsible for a higher level of potential risk at their swimming facilities and, consequently, liable for greater civil and criminal penalties. There are various types of liability that can be considered in relation to hiring, such as negligence in instructing swimming classes, failure to meet the risk management model or failure to provide a safe environment for participants in swimming pools.

    Facility and Equipment Liability

    In Robinson v. Chicago Park Dist (2001), Ralph Robinson and three ofhis friends went to the Carver Park pool to swim. Shortly after entering the pool, Robinson's friend saw Ralph jump off the diving board into the deep end of the pool, swim to the edge, and then exit the pool. He then saw Ralph jump off the diving board a second time and go under water toward the shallow end of the pool. At that time, one of the lifeguards was on the telephone and another was sitting on a bench engaged in conversation. When Robinson's friend walked to the deep end, he saw Ralph lying on the bottom of the pool. Both of Robinson's friends testified that they were yelling and waving for a lifeguard at this point, but that the lifeguard, looking in their direction, failed to respond. One lifeguard eventually dove into the pool, retrieved Ralph, and began administering CPR; another lifeguard brought an oxygen tank. Ralph was resuscitated, but died several days later. The final verdict of the Appellate Court held that the city park district was immune from liability under The Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act for a minor's accidental drowning death because it was an undisputed fact that two lifeguards were present on the pool deck.

    Aquatic management tends to involve a number of lawsuits, including seemingly trivial issues such as wet floors in locker rooms and the injury of children by broken, underwater tiles. By reviewing these cases, we can understand more about the liability issues associated with swimming pools.

    Liability in swimming class

    During the summer, many swimming classes are held at community colleges and universities. Issues of liability in school swimming classes are important concerns to both management and the general public.

    In Roberson v. San Diego Unified School District (2002), Frederick Roberson, who was fifteen years old, drowned in the pool at the Jackie Robinson YMCA. Roberson was emolled in the Alternative Learning for Behavior and Attitude (ALBA) program, which was conducted at the YMCA. When the drowning occurred, the ALBA instructional aide was not stationed by the swimming pool and the YMCA lifeguard was not sitting on the elevated lifeguard chair. When Frederick showed signs of distress, the lifeguard thought he was fooling around. The lifeguard eventually realized Frederick was in distress. Two off-duty lifeguards rescued Frederick and tried to resuscitate him until the police and paramedics came. The parties stipulated that drowning caused Frederick's death.

    The essential issue upon which Roberson depended related to Procedure 4178, a local regulation effective in 1970 and amended in 1995, requiring that swimming pools "be used only for instructional, competitive, and cocurricular aquatics activities under the supervision of authorized district staff." A minimum of four staff members, having specific qualifications, was required for instructional and cocurricular aquatics activities. Roberson moved to admit Procedure 4178 into evidence, but the court denied the motion, as there was no evidence that Procedure 4178, as revised in 1995, was in effect at the time of the drowning. The court determined that the admission of Procedure 4178 would be, under the circumstances, highly prejudicial. The jury eventually found the District not negligent in a vote of nine to three.

    RISK MANAGEMENT MODELS

    Effective management of risks begins at the conceptual stage and continues through construction and operation of aquatic facilities in the United States (Schwartz, 1998). For this reason, it is essential to examine various existing risk management models. It is very important for aquatic directors to understand and implement a risk management plan, and especially important to incorporate applicable standards of practice into their own risk management. Clement (1988, 1998 & 2004) stated that the risk management system requires a systematic examination of the environment, with identification of potential loss and legal liability.

    There are three steps in the risk management processes proposed by Ammon (2001) and Carpenter (1995). Several risk management models provide a four-step process (Hronek & Spengler, 2002; Mulrooney & Farmer, 1998). Five steps are listed in the risk management models ofBerlonghi (1990), Head and Horn (1991), and Miller (1989). The aforesaid risk management models provide several steps in a "process" (Ammon, 2001; Berlonghi, 1990; Carpenter, 1995; Head & Horn, 1991; Hronek & Spengler, 2002; Madden, 1998; Mulrooney & Farmer, 1998); however, Clement (1988, 1998 & 2004) designated her model a "system" and Fried (1999) refers to his six-step model as an "approach" or more specifically, the "ECT Approach Model: Evaluation, Control and Treatment."

    Head and Horn's (1991) five-step risk management decision-making process involves: (1) identifying exposure to loss, (2) examining feasibility of alternati~e techniques, (3) selecting the apparently best techniques, (4) implementing the chosen techniques, and ( 5) monitoring and improving the risk management plan.

    It is important to remember, when implementing risk management, that it is most efficient to fully integrate the management ofrisks into an organization's management practices. This includes incorporating treatment strategies and control mechanisms into the organization's plans, as well as risk treatment actions, treatment monitoring, and review of the organization's processes and procedures. By integrating the risk management process as a part of normal practice, it should not become an additional "overhead" that members of an organization have to bear. The integrated model is demonstrated in Figure 1 (Australian Sports Commission, 1999).

    Figure 1. An integrated approach to risk management

    Fletemeyer (2003) stated that aquatic liability is approaching a paradigm shift and need aquatic professionals to have a certain level of understanding to implement the basic principles of aquatic risk management. He also said that the needs for aquatic risk management were because threats of negligence litigation, trends for courts to impose verdicts favoring the plaintiff, the need to better educate the public about aquatic safety, high level of awareness by the public about the dangers associated with aquatic environments, and stronger emphasis is being placed on preventative practices rather than on reactionary measures (Fletemeyer, 2003). The field of physical education and sport carries with it an unquestionably higher risk of injury than most other areas ofa school's curriculum, especially in aquatic activities. The relative ease with which one can institute a lawsuit and the high likelihood of some form of settlement, regardless of the relative strength of the case, has led to an increasing level of professional concern over issues related to risk management and liability. Further, although no amount of planning or preparation can guarantee freedom from injuries and subsequent lawsuits, a thorough understanding of the legal process and the elements of risk management can significantly increase one's chances of success when such a situation arises.

    Most litigation involving aquatics emanates from the injury of a participant, the injured plaintiff alleging negligence on the part of the institution. Negligence in such cases is conduct that falls below the standard established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk or harm. Fletemeyer (2003) provided seven steps for increasing safety in aquatic risk management. They are:

    • Step 1: identifying goals and objectives;
    • Step 2: organizing an assessment team;
    • Step 3: identifying and measuring risks;
    • Step 4: providing effective warning;
    • Step 5: training staff;
    • Step 6: record keeping;
    • Step 7: conducting performance and safety audits.

    Many hazards related to aquatic environment aren't easily recognizable. If aquatic directors can understand and are willing to apply these seven steps into their aquatic center, it will not difficult to see evidences ofmajorimprovements within the aquatic centers.

    The swimming-pool industry assumes greater responsibility when assisting aquatic directors in conducting activities in a safe manner and environment. While policies and procedures must be established and enforced for the effective employment of programs, and for the health and safety of participants, rules and regulations cannot be perceived by participants as too restrictive or controlling. Aquatic administrative personnel can work together to promote aquatic programs that are educationally inviting and legally defensible, but maintaining the delicate balance between participant autonomy and institutional jurisdiction remains challenging.

    THE "BEST -FIT" MODEL

    The conceptual framework used in this study is a self-developed "four-step" risk management practice model, inspired by Lacey and Pritchett (2003), designed and developed by the researcher. The four steps are described as follow: (1) Risk Assessment, (2) Risk Diagnosis, (3) Risk Intervention, and (4) Risk Evaluation. The basic idea for developing this "four-step" model is because the researcher realized the importance of risk management model and the development of risk management manual. He wanted to provide this simple and concise concept for aquatic directors to apply to their facilities. Hopefully this "best-fit" risk management model will be accepted, understood and utilized by aquatic directors. In the near future, the researcher will develop a complete risk management manual for use in the area of aquatic management.

    This "best-fit" model was designed so that one could easily apply the four-step system in practical applications. Aquatic directors, by using this model, may more easily apply the concepts of risk management to their swimming facilities and eventually reduce potential risk in the aquatic management setting.

    The first step of this model is risk assessment which involves trying to figure out if potential risk is involved. An aquatic director, for example, would fIrst identify and assess the problems and causes and ensure that his/her staff is followi~g standard procedures in operating the facilities in their assigned areas, including the locker room, spa area, Jacuzzi, and swimming pool.

    In the second step of risk diagnosis, an aquatic director should collect enough data to make sure that he/she can determine cause and contribute risk factors by previous data. He/she needs to be able to define characteristics of risk and make sure that they can provide a good solution for such accidents or incidents.

    The implementation of the third step, risk interventions, will assist, in not only providing a safe environment in aquatic facilities, but will also protect customers. When accidents happen, causes and solutions can be more readily identified by using risk intervention. In other words, when risk occurs, aquatic directors should have good judgment in order to make an immediate decision to intervene the risk and try to minimize it. Daily operational checklists should be on file and the emergency action and risk management plans should be regularly practiced.

    The fourth step is risk evaluation. According to the researcher, aquatic directors need to monitor the process of aquatic activities, measure all outcome indicators and analyze and evaluate all causes of outcomes in order to seek the proper way to transfer, reduce or eliminate the potential risk. Documentation is required in all four steps and should be kept on file for future reference.

    In this model, the "Fundamental Concept of Risk Management" plays a key role as the conceptual framework. Why? Aquatic directors, through this center-oriented concept, can extend his/her risk management practices through the "Four-steps" to get better results and they apply their own risk management knowledge, risk management skill and competencies, critical thinking (judgment), collaboration ability, communication skill and risk management practices to the real risk environment in aquatic facilities.

    Figure 1 demonstrates the whole concept and details the model of risk management practice developed and designed by the researcher:

    • Risk Environment
    • Risk Managemet Knowledge
    • RIsk Dlagnosis
    • Obtain and collect data
    • Determine cause and contributing risk factors
    • RIsk Assessment
    • Identify problem
    • Identify causes and interpretation
    • Document
    • RIsk Evaluation
    • Monitor process
    • Measure outcome indicators
    • Evaluate and analyze outcomes
    • Transfer the potential risk
    • Document
    • Collaboration

    Figure 1. Risk Management Practice Model

    No "best" model exIsts, but trying to provide a "best-fit" model is possible and more practical. Reducing the potential risk in aquatic facilities is the responsibility of aquatic directors. The researcher hopes this "best-fit" model can provide some practical skill and application for general aquatic facilities. Most swimming pool environments and hazards are highly dynamic, changing day to day and even minute to minute. Consequently, risk management in aquatic must be regarded as an ongoing process, requiring a considerable time commitment by trained staff and a focus on a regimen involving continuous monitoring and evaluation.

    CONCLUSION

    From a review of relevant literature, as well as a number of risk management models, we know that risk management is an essential element for all areas of sport -- knowing how to prevent, and otherwise reduce, the potential for risk is critically important. We can argue that risk management is not only useful, but should also be considered an indispensable practice. The professional aquatic director should not only recognize the importance of risk management and related legal issues, but should also either establish or diligently follow the management procedure of his/her institution - anything less invites litigation. Those concepts gleaned from the literature that are pertinent to the proposed subjects are:

    • Accidents occur in aquatics.
    • Many of these accidents result in death or severe debilitating injuries.
    • A number of these cases result in litigation.
    • Aquatic directors should be more aware of the implementation of risk management.
    • A comprehensive "best-fit" risk management model should be highlighted and introduced to the area of aquatics.
    • The concept of a safe environment should be highlighted.
    • The importance of the application of "best-fit" risk management model in aquatics.

    Risk management programs are inclined to enhance aquatics safety. The best way for implementing risk management is to provide safety and continue to provide practical risk management education to all aquatic directors. The researcher hopes that the "best- fit" model can be adopted by aquatic directors for application to their aquatic facilities, in hopes of ultimately reducing the occurrence of swimrning-related accidents and therefore, related litigation.

    REFERENCES
    • American family Physician (1989, June). Factors associated with adult drowning. American Academy of Family Physicians.
    • Ammon, R. (2001). Risk Management process. In D. Cotten, J. T. Wolohan, & T. J. Wilde (2nd Ed.), Law for recreation and sport managers (pp. 265-277), Dubuque, lA: Kendall /Hunt Publishing Company.
    • Australian Sports Commission. (1999). Risk ManagementforDirectors and Board members of National Sporting Organisations (pp. 6-8), Standards Australia International.
    • Berlonghi, A. (1990). The special events risk manual. Dana Point, CA: Alexander Berlonghi.
    • Carpenter, L. J. (1995). Legal concepts in sport: A primer. Reston V A: The American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance.
    • Clement, A. (1997). Legal responsibility in aquatics. Sport and Law Press, Aurora, Ohio.
    • Clement, A. (1998). Aquatics and the Law. In H. Appenzeller (Ed.), Risk Management in Sport (pp. 375-385). Durham, North Carolina: Carolina Academic Press.
    • Clement, A. (2001). Children and Water Injuries. In J. L. Frost (Ed.), Children and Injuries (pp. 333-372). Lawyers & Judges Publishing Company, Inc.
    • Clement, A. (2004). Law in Sport and Physical Activity. (3rd ed). Sport and Law Press, Inc. Dania, FL. (I st ed 1988, 2nd ed. 1998)
    • Fawcett, P. (2001 ). Ten reasons for hiring qualified aquatic professionals: aquatified aquatic professional will provide a wealth of knowledge from training, education, and operations to the average aquatic facility, Parks & Recreation.
    • Fletemeyer, J. (2003, Feb.). Effective aquatic risk management: seven steps to lowering your liability. Park & Recreation.
    • Fried, G. B., & Appenzeller, H. (Ed.). (1999). Safe atfirst: A guide to help sports administrators reduce their liability. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic
    • Gale Encyclopedia of Childhood & Adolescence. (1998). Swimming. Gale Research. Gamer, B. A. (2000). Black's law dictionary (7th ed.). St. Paul, Minn: West Group.
    • Graham, S., Goldblatt, J., & Delpy, L. (1995). The ultimate guide to sport and event management & marketing. Chicago: Irwin Professional Publishing.
    • Head, G., & Horn, S., II. (1991). Essentials ofriskmanagement (Vol. I, 2nd ed.). Malvern, PA: Insurance Institute of America.
    • Hronek, B. B., & Spengler, J. 0. (2002). Leal liability in recreation and sport. Champaign, IL: Sangamore Publishing.
    • Lacey, K., & Pritchett, E. (2003). Nutrition Care Process and Model: ADA adopts road may to quality care and outcomes management. Journal of THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION.
    • Madden, T. D. (1998). Risk management and facility insurance. In T. D. Madden (Ed.), Public assembly facility law (pp. 199-230). Irving, TX: International Association of Assembly Managers.
    • Miller, A. W. (1989). Risk Management. In G. Nygaard & T. Boone (Eds.), Law for physical educators and coaches (pp. 419-437). Columbus, OH: Publishing Horizons.
    • Mitchell, M., & Feigley, D. A. (2002). Principles of Safety in Physical Education and Sport. Oxon Hill, MD: AAHPERD Publications.
    • Mulrooney, A. L., & Farmer, P. J. (1998). Law for physical educators and coaches (2nd ed.). Columbus, Ohio: Publishing Horizons, Inc.
    • National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS). (Fall 2003). NEISS Data Highlights-2002. Consumer Product Safety Review, 8(2), 3- 7.
    • National Spa & Pool Institute (NSPI). (2003). The Economic Impact of the Pool and Spa Industry. Retrieved Dec 19,2003, from http://www.nspi.org/news_room/news- releases/825.cfm.
    • Roberson v. San Diego Unified School District. WL 997746(Cal.App. 4 Dist. 2002)
    • Robison v. Chicago Park Dist. 757 N.E.2d 565 (2001). Schwartz, D. (1998). Aquaticfacilities: managing risk in the physical environment, Park & Recreation.
    • Spannuth, J. (2001). Don't Call Your Swimming Pool A Lap Pool! Retrieved August 31, 2004, from http://www.uswfa.com/forms/pressrelease1.pdf
    • US Bureau of the Census. (1995). Statistical abstract of the United States: 115th ed. Washington, DC: US Burasu of the Census.
    • van der Smissen, B. (1990). Legal liability and risk management for public and private entities. Cincinnati: Anderson Publishing Company.
    • Walker, et al. v. Daniels, et al. 200150,407 S.E.2d 70 (Ga. App. 1991).
    • West Law. (2003). Retrieved July 18,2003, from http://lawschool.westlaw.com

    ---

    ---

    ---

    Professional Preparation

    for the Recreational Sports Specialist

    
    
    

    Dr. Sarah Young

    Indiana University

    Dr. Craig Ross

    Indiana Univerrsity

    
    
    
    
    

    Contact:Sarah Young, Ph.D.

    Associate Professor

    Indiana University

    Department of Heathl, Physical Education and Recreation

    HPER 133 1025 East 7th Street

    Bloomington, Indiana 47405

    (812) 855-3085

    Accepted: September, 2004

    ---

    Abstract

    Recreational sport has experienced tremendous growth over the past couple of decades increasing the demand for qualified sport managers. There are two primary emphases in sport management which lead professionals to focus upon different aspects of sport. One of those emphases is recreational sports management. This article provides a thorough explanation of the professional preparation of the recreational sport manager through a description of the curriculum, professional organizations, and certifications that are common to this position. The settings where recreational sport managers are most likely to be found are described along with a discussion of the types of career opportunities that are available to individual educated and trained in this area.

    Keywords: recreational sport, sport management, professional preparation

    Introduction

    Sport in American society has undergone tremendous change over the past several decades. These changes have had a significant impact on the way sport and leisure services have been delivered in the past, and will continue to be delivered in the future. On the one hand, sport has become very entertainment- and spectator-oriented with attendance records being broken at various sporting events. On the other hand, sport has become very participant-oriented involving diverse populations in a wide variety of programs and activities. With such a wide spectrum of sport participation by such large numbers of people, the impact of sport upon society has grown significantly. Kelly (1996) supported this observation by stating, "Sport has a major role in modern society as an element of the economy, a spectacle with symbolic meanings, an arena of development for the young, and in the leisure lives of many individuals" (p. 226).

    Recreational sport management, as a part of leisure services, has also experienced a tremendous growth over the last couple of decades with sport participation far surpassing all other types of recreational activities (Shivers & de Lisle, 1997; Edginton, Jordan, DeGraaf, & Edginton, 1998). Robinson and Godbey (1997) in their book Time for Life have even described sports and fitness activities as "mainstays in the lifestyles of large numbers of Americans" (p. 186). The recreative aspect of sport in American culture today is well-established and a recognized contributor to human enjoyment and vitality. With this growth and interest there have been increased opportunities for employment in recreational sports with positions ranging from the face-to-face leadership roles of part-time personnel to top administrative positions. The academic areas of leisure studies and physical education have attempted to meet the needs and demands of both students and practitioners by offering both undergraduate and graduate sport management curriculums. Changing times and increasing interest and demand in sport participation and fitness by all age groups have spurred the growth of diverse academic professional preparation programs offering degrees and courses in sport management. The pursuit of adequate curricula to meet the many interests and demands of the wide variety of sport management programs is a difficult task. It appears that no single curriculum will fulfill this need, thus, colleges and universities have responded by developing and offering several curriculums.

    There exist two primary types of curriculum or emphases in sport management which send professionals in different directions as far as a career focus. Traditionally, sport management programs have been housed in Kinesiology/Physical Education departments and have focused on the business side of professional and intercollegiate sports-specifically sports marketing, public relations, and fund raising. Since only a small percentage of individuals actively participate in sport at these levels, the majority of participation is in the form of spectating. Sport managers involved in this aspect of sport work with marketing, public relations, sales, communications, fund-raising, and even retail as essential aspects of their jobs. The bottom line in the jobs of these sport managers is profit-driven while providing entertainment for the millions of sports spectators who attend not only professional sport events, but collegiate, and even high school events. Some of the positions that are available to sport managers in this area are sport information director, athletic director, public relations manager, community relations manager, ticket sales manager, and sponsor relations director. Competition for these types of positions can be fierce as many individuals want to be affiliated with the spot light that professional or varsity sports attract. As a result, salaries tend to be low because the supply of people seeking jobs always exceeds the demand (Masteralexis, 1998). Often times the sport managers who have obtained success in these positions have obtained advanced degrees in law or business in addition to a degree in sport management.

    A second and more recent emphasis of sport management, and the primary focus of this article, is upon the leadership and management of participatory sport experiences including the recreational sport participant. The focus of the recreational sport manager is to provide sport programs for the average, or below-average-skilled participant. What follows is a more in-depth look at the positions of the recreational sport manager, the settings where these positions are found, and the professional preparation that is involved for jobs in this area.

    Why the Recreational Sport Manager is Needed

    The primary goal of the recreational sport manager is to provide the highest quality program within the setting where he or she works. Mull, Bayless, Ross and Jamieson (1997) suggested there are three objectives in the provision of recreational sport programs that explain why the manager is needed. The first objective is service which involves providing a variety of sport programs through activities, facilities and personnel. The second objective is development through which social, mental and physical changes in the participant can occur. The third, and final objective is relations which deal with providing good customer service as well as promoting positive community relations in the setting where the program is located. These objectives assist in justifying the recreational sport manager's role in delivering programs as well as providing more meaningful insight into the job of the sport manager for students interested in pursuing this career path.

    
    
    

    Types of Positions

    There are four types of personnel commonly found in settings providing recreational sport services: administrative staff, program-administrative staff, program staff and auxiliary staff. The administrative staff is responsible for directing the operation of the sports program and its resources. Some specific duties of the administrator are to direct or influence the planning, acquisition, design, construction, and maintenance of sport facilities; supervise the total staff development program; prepare, present and monitor the annual budgets; and, interpret to the public the program philosophy and offerings. Typical job titles at this level are director, or executive director with the completion of a masters degree usually required. Individuals in these top administrative positions usually have a minimum of 10 to 12 years experience in a recreational sports program.

    The program-administrative staff directs administrative policies, guidelines and resources, while monitoring programs, facilities and program staff. While individuals in this role engage in many administrative duties, they also serve as a liaison between the top administrator and the program staff. Job titles most often found at this level are associate director, program director, facility manager, and sports director. Individuals in these positions usually have earned both a bachelors and a masters degree in recreation, sport management, or a related field, and have a minimum of six to eight years of programming experience.

    The program staff is an entry-level position which is responsible for direct contact with participants and the delivery of services. Individuals in this role organize and direct sport activities, initiate publicity and promotion, handle equipment utilization, purchasing and inventory, and implement policies for safety, participant control and governance. The program staff is also responsible for the recruitment, hiring, training, and scheduling of support staff. Typical job titles at this level are assistant director, coordinator and activity specialist. Many of these positions require a masters degree while others only require a bachelors degree, but prefer candidates with a masters degree. Most graduates of a recreational sport curriculum find full-time employment at the program staff level although many have gained experience from the auxiliary staff level.

    The fourth category of recreational sports personnel is auxiliary staff. This staff position consists of hourly wage, or volunteer positions that provide face-to-face relationships with the participants in the program. The auxiliary staff primarily consists of seasonal or part-time positions such as officials, supervisors, lifeguards, maintenance crews, and youth sport coaches. Although this is the level at which many program staff gain experience, individuals obtaining employment at this level usually possess some type of specialized credentials such as first aid, CPR, sport official certification, or youth sport coaching certification.

    Where Recreational Sport Positions are Found

    The settings, or locations that one might find recreational sports personnel are varied. Mull et al. (1997) cite ten different types of settings where recreational sports personnel are likely to be found. The municipal setting consists of city and community parks and recreation programs providing sport experiences for different age groups residing in that particular location. Businesses and corporations implement recreational sports as a benefit to their employees often times providing on-site programs and facilities. Non-profit organizations provide another setting for recreational sports, with such agencies as YMCAs, YWCAs, Boys and Girls Clubs, Boy Scouts, and Girl Scouts. Recreational sport programs in these organizations are provided not only for fun, but also to help develop character, fitness, and positive living skills of the participants. Military installations, correctional facilities, and educational institutions also serve as settings for recreational sports providing a wide variety of sport activities for each of their respective clientele. Private clubs and vacation resorts are yet two more settings where recreational sports program occur. Private clubs, such as country clubs provide recreational sport opportunities for their membership while vacation resorts, such as hotels, motels and cruise ships, offer a wide variety of activities and special events for their guests.

    Steps in Professional Preparation

    Sport management is an unique area of study. The first sport management curriculum was implemented at Ohio University in 1966 with a graduate degree in sports administration. In 1980, there were 20 graduate programs in sport management known to exist. By 1985, 83 academic institutions were identified as providing a curriculum in sport management while by 1993, this number grew to 120 (NASPE-NASSM Joint Task Force, 1993). Today, nearly 250 sport management undergraduate and graduate programs exist in the United States alone.

    Curriculums in sport management have changed somewhat since the original program at Ohio University. Historically, there was a strong physical education (non-teaching) orientation to the course content and career objectives. This link to the past is still apparent in many sport management curricula today which are rooted in Kinesiology/Physical Education departments on campuses. However, in many of today's recreational sport management curriculums there is a multi-disciplinary approach which borrows concepts and theories not only from recreation and physical education, but from business disciplines as well. In a recent survey of 132 institutions providing professional preparation in sport management, Ross, Jamieson, and Young (1998) found that while the majority of sport management curricula are administratively housed in departments of Kinesiology or Physical Education, a growing number of curricula were also found in departments of recreation and leisure studies. The survey also revealed that in almost one-half of the sport management curricula the primary emphasis was a balance of recreational sport management and professional sport marketing.

    A typical undergraduate recreational sports curriculum consists of four major components: (a) general education courses, (b) "core" professional recreation education courses such as leisure philosophy, recreation leadership methods, programming principles and development, budgeting, and evaluation, (c) recreational sport management specialization requirements which include first aid and emergency care, facility management, sport/tournament programming, marketing, legal aspects of sports and personnel management, and (d) professional internship experience . The intent of the general recreation courses is to prepare students with the fundamental knowledge of recreation programming so they are equipped to enter the work-force at the program-staff level. This type of curriculum would then provide the foundation from which students can spring-board into specialized courses such as sport programming and tournament scheduling, personnel management, sport marketing and promotions, sport facilities, and legal aspects as they relate to recreational sport programming.

    At the graduate level more emphasis is placed upon the administration of recreational sport programs through such courses as sport administration, finance, marketing, facility management, research methods and sport law. This administrative emphasis at the graduate level is supported by Kelley, Beitel, DeSensi and Blanton (1994) in their discussion of sport management curricula when they stated that persons with graduate degrees "would be prepared to accept positions at the administrative policy development level" (p. 98). Individuals earning a graduate degree are more likely to be hired in at the program-administrative level although the number of years of practical experience is still taken into consideration.

    A common thread of the professional preparation program in sport management is practical, hands-on experience obtained through a practicum and/or internship experience. In many cases, these experiences are viewed as the foundation or cornerstone of the curriculum and a stepping stone to a professional job with that agency or similar agency. During these experiences with a sport agency, the student observes and learns from a recreation professional and performs many career related tasks. The internship provides the opportunity to apply theoretical concepts to practical situations.

    Curricular standards in sport management are generally supported by the National Recreation and Park Association/American Association of Leisure and Recreation Council on Accreditation (NRPA/AALR) in the leisure service management area. The National Intramural-Recreational Sports Association (NIRSA) Curriculum Committee has also provided direction in terms of recreational sport competencies and course content suggestions. The North American Society for Sport Management/National Association of Sport and Physical Education (NASSM/NASPE) has more specific sport management standards.

    Professional Organizations and Certifications

    A career in recreational sport management can certainly prove to be promising for those willing to pursue it. However, it is essential for recreational sport practitioners to maintain and refine their professional skills in order to stay current. Many recreational sports practitioners hold active memberships in a variety of professional organizations focused upon providing an opportunity for their members to share ideas, advance the industry standards, and guide the behavior of their members. Those professional organizations which are most closely aligned with recreational sports management are:

    AAHPERD - American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance

    NIRSA - National Intramural-Recreational Sports Association

    NRPA - National Recreation and Park Association

    NASSM - North American Society for Sport Management

    AAALF - American Association for Active Lifestyles and Fitness

    AALR - American Association for Leisure and Recreation

    IHRSA - International Health and Racquet Sport Association

    NESRA - National Employee Services and Recreation Association

    CBI - Club Business International

    AAU - Amateur Athletic Union

    ACSM - American College of Sport Medicine

    NASPE - National Association for Sport and Physical Education

    These professional organizations with opportunities for conferences, workshops, seminars and management schools provide an important link in assisting the recreational sport manager to stay abreast of our rapidly changing society and its implications for program delivery.

    Professional certifications also seem to be emerging as a common method of maintaining and refining recreational sport management skills. Espinosa (1997) supported the concept of professional certifications for recreational sports managers by stating "the mode of survival in today's dynamic climate requires that we be constant, active learners" (p. 35). Many opportunities exist for recreational sports professionals to gain certification, however, the most frequently obtained certifications by recreational sport practitioners are:

    General Programming Certification Programs

    CLP - Certified Leisure Professional (NRPA)

    CRSS - Certified Recreational Sports Specialist (NIRSA)

    CPO - Certified Pool Operator (National Swimming Pool Foundation)

    Health and Fitness Certification Programs

    Health and fitness certifications (American College of Sport Medicine and American Council on Exercise)

    CHES - Certified Health Education Specialist

    Youth Sport Coaching Certification Programs

    National Youth Sport Coaches Association (NYSCA)

    American Sport Education Program (Human Kinetics, Inc.)

    Conclusion

    Because of the tremendous role that sport now plays in our society and the demand for increased opportunities to participate in a myriad of recreational sport activities, there is an obvious need for programmers specializing in recreational sports management. While the similarities between general recreation practitioners and the recreational sport manager admittedly overlap, it is the scope of sport that creates the primary differentiation between the two professional roles. As a result, the professional preparation of students anticipating careers in recreational sport management differs from that of the general recreation practitioner by focusing upon the development of knowledge and skills directly related to sports programming.

    
    
    
    References

    Edginton, C. R., Jordan, D. J., DeGraaf, D. G., & Edginton, S. R. (1998). Leisure and life satisfaction: Foundational perspectives (2^nd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

    Espinosa, C. (1997). Professional certification: Seizing the opportunity. NIRSA Journal, 21,(3), 35-37.

    Kelley, D. R., Beitel, P. A., DeSensi, J. T., & Blanton, M. D. (1994). Undergraduate and graduate sport management curricular models: A perspective. Journal of Sport Management, 8, 93-101.

    Kelly, J. R. (1996). Leisure (3^rd ed.). Boston , MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Masteralexis, L. P. (1998). Professional sport. In L. P. Masteralexis, C. A. Barr, and M. A. Hums (Eds.), Principles and practice of sport management (pp. 275-306). Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers, Inc.

    Mull, R. F., Bayless, K. G., Ross, C. M., & Jamieson, L. M. (1997). Recreational sport management (3^rd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishing.

    NASPE-NASSM Joint Task Force on Sport Management Curriculum and Accreditation. (1993). Standards for curriculum and voluntary accreditation of sport management education programs. Journal of Sport Management, (7), 159-170.

    Robinson, J. P., and Godbey, G. (1997). Time for life: The surprising ways Americans use their time. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University.

    Ross, C. M., Jamieson, L. M., & Young, S. J. (1998). Professional preparation of sport management: A national study (Monograph). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University, Department of Recreation and Park Administration.

    Shivers, J. S. & de Lisle, L. J. (1997). The story of leisure: Context, concepts, and current controversy. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishing.

    ---

    ---

    ---

    Employment Competencies in Public Parks and Recreation

    Eric L. Longsdorf, Ph.D. Department of Public Health and Rehabilitative Services

    Contact: Eric L. Longsdorf

    Address Correspondences to: Eric L. Longsdorf

    Mail Stop 201

    The University of Toledo

    2801 West Bancroft Street

    Toledo, Ohio 43606-3390,

    Phone: (419) 292-0893 (H)

    Phone: (419) 530-2742 (W)

    Email: eric.longsdorf@utoledo.edu

    Accepted: September, 2004

    Abstract

    The purpose of this study was to identify the perceived importance of various recognized competencies for professional practice and personal credentialing as each relates to the successful provision of recreation, park resources, and leisure-related services within public parks and recreation. The specific objectives of this study were: 1) to determine the most important areas of professional preparation that should be covered in the greatest breadth in curricula used to prepare individuals for careers in public parks and recreation, and 2) to determine the perceived importance of demonstrating professional competency mastery through maintaining Certified Park and Recreation Professional (CPRP) certification. Results from this study indicated that public park and recreation administrators perceived the areas of administration and management and leisure programming strategies to be the areas that should be provided the greatest breadth of study in professional preparation curricula. Results further indicated that the perceived value of CPRP certification is growing within the profession.

    Keywords: Public Recreation, Professional Preparation, Credentialing, Parks, Leisure

    Introduction

    Within the recreation, park resources, and leisure services profession the distinct body of knowledge that should be possessed by individuals preparing for entry-level positions within the profession are reflected in the Professional Competencies (series standards 8.00) of the Standards and Evaluative Criteria for Baccalaureate Programs in Recreation, Park Resources and Leisure Services (National Recreation and Park Association [NRPA], 2000). Formally accepted by the NRPA and American Association of Leisure and Recreation (AALR) sponsored Council on Accreditation in 1975 (NRPA, 1975), these standards represent the core areas of knowledge required for professional practice in the delivery of effective recreation, park resources and leisure-related services (Parr, 1996). The Professional Competency series consists of 42 criterion referenced standards. These standards are classified into eight specific topical classifications that address the following areas of professional understanding and practice: Conceptual Foundations, Leisure Services Profession; Leisure Services Delivery Systems; Programming Strategies; Assessment, Planning and Evaluation; Administration and Management; Legislative and Legal Aspects; and Field Experience. However, because the Professional Competency series standards are criterion referenced their use as a guide for professional preparation does have limitations. These limitations result from the fact that criterion referenced standards only represent minimum levels of proficiency (Baumgartner, Strong, & Hensley, 2002) and generally do not discern a relative standing or comparison (Lundegren & Farrell, 1985). As a result, what is difficult to discern from our professionÕs Professional Competency series standards is what topical classification areas are more important or less important as the competencies comprising each topical classification area apply to professional practice. This is not to state that any single Professional Competency standard or topical classification of standards is of no importance to preparation for professional practice, only that it should be expected that certain individual competencies and topical classification areas should require a greater breadth of study and understanding. The purpose of this study was to identify the perceived importance of various recognized competencies for professional practice and personal credentialing as each relates to the successful provision of recreation, park resources, and leisure-related services within public parks and recreation. The specific objectives of this study were: 1) to determine the most important areas of professional preparation that should be covered in the greatest breadth in curricula used to prepare individuals for careers in public parks and recreation, and 2) to determine the perceived importance of demonstrating professional competency mastery through maintaining Certified Park and Recreation Professional (CPRP) certification.

    Method Instrumentation

    The author developed a measurement instrument specific to the purpose of the study. Content items included in the measurement instrument were developed from the Professional Competencies (series standards 8.00) of the Standards and Evaluative Criteria for Baccalaureate Programs in Recreation, Park Resources, and Leisure Services (NRPA, 2000) and the testing domains outlined in the Official Study Guide for the Certified Park and Recreation Professional Examination (Rossman & McKinney, 2000). These references guided the development of the content items of the measurement instrument that addressed at minimum three professional competencies related to: conceptual foundations, leisure services profession; leisure services delivery systems; programming strategies; assessment, planning and evaluation; administration and management; and legislative and legal aspects. Content items of the measurement instrument also addressed the perceived level at which recreation, park resources, and leisure services professional preparation programs were preparing students for professional practice in public parks and recreation and the perceived importance of CPRP certification. Content items on the measurement instrument were randomly positioned, not including the content item addressing the perceived level of professional preparation of students and content items addressing CPRP certification. The content item addressing the level of professional preparation of students was positioned as the last scaled item on the measurement instrument. Content items addressing CPRP certification were positioned in demographic content items developed to profile each respondentÕs agency. Validity of the survey questionnaire was verified by the authorsÕ decision to adopt NRPA published Professional Competency standards. Reliability testing for all scaled content items was done using a test-retest procedure. Reliability was measured using PearsonÕs r correlation coefficients. The responses to the 34 scaled content items were summed to create a total score. The scores on this scale were found to have acceptable reliability (r = .77).

    Sample Selection

    Six Hundred administrators operating public park and recreation agencies from across the United States were randomly identified using systematic sampling from a database of administrators registered as members with the NRPA. In order to be eligible to participate in the study a respondent had to be employed at the time the survey instrument was received as the director, supervisor, or administrator of the public park and recreation agency in which the measurement instrument was addressed. Out of the 600 potential respondents identified for the study 567 met the study criteria. RespondentÕs solicited to participate in the study received: a personalized cover letter indicating participant identification procedures, confidentiality procedures, and information pertaining to the studyÕs purpose; a copy of the measurement instrument; and a coded self-addressed pre-stamped envelope for returning the completed measurement instrument.

    Response Rate

    An initial and follow-up mailing of the measurement instrument yielded 331 responses, a return rate of 58.38%. Twenty-eight of the survey instruments returned were removed from the study due to incomplete or unusable data which yielded 303 useable responses and a usable response rate of 53.44%.

    Data Analysis

    Data analysis for the study was done using SPSS statistical software. All data reported in the result section was analyzed and reported as grouped data. Only measurement instruments with no missing points of data were included in the study analysis. The total number of respondents for each content item analyzed and reported is 303.

    Results

    The results of this study are presented in 11 brief sections. The first result section reports the mean rankings of all professional preparation competency areas addressed on the measurement instrument. Sections two through eight report the mean rankings of all professional preparation competencies grouped into the appropriate topical classification area for which each was developed. Sections two through eight are presented in the following order: (1) the conceptual foundations of leisure services; (2) the leisure services profession; (3) the leisure services delivery system; (4) leisure programming strategies; (5) leisure assessment, planning and evaluation; (6) leisure administration management; and (7) the legal aspects of leisure service delivery. Result section nine reports the percentile ranking of each topical classification area. Result Section 10 reports the mean ranking of the respondentÕs perceived level at which students graduating from recreation, park resources, and leisure services professional preparation programs are being prepared for professional practice. Result section 11 reports the respondentÕs perceived importance of demonstrating competency mastery through maintaining CPRP certification. Means reported in result sections one through eight reflect a perceived level of importance on a five-point scale (i.e., 1=Not at All Important, 5=Very Important). The mean reported in result section 10 reflects the perceived level of professional preparation of recreation, park resources, and leisure services students on a five-point scale (i.e., 1=Very Well, 5= Not Well). Result section 11 reports the perceived importance of CPRP certification to professional practice using frequency data.

    Individual Professional Preparation Competency Means

    Out of the 33 competency content items included in the measurement instrument respondents identified three (9%) as having a mean importance ranking ranging from 4.50 to 5.00, twelve (36%) ranging from 4.00 to 4.49, sixteen (49%) ranging from 3.50 to 3.99, one (3%) ranging from 3.00 to 3.49, and one (3%) ranging from 2.50 to 2.99. Of those competencies that reported a mean importance ranking ranging from 4.50 to 5.00, (n=3) three (100%) were competencies related to administration and management. Competencies reported with a mean importance ranking ranging from 4.00 to 4.49 (n=12) included five (42%) related to administration and management, three (25%) related to the leisure services profession, two (17%) related to leisure programming strategies, one (8%) related to legislative and legal aspects, and one (8%) related to assessment, planning and evaluation. Mean importance rankings ranging from 3.50 to 3.99 (n=16) included five (31%) competencies related to assessment, planning and evaluation, four (25%) competencies related to conceptual foundations, three (19%) competencies related to legislative and legal aspects, three (19%) competencies related to the leisure services delivery system, and one (6%) competency related to leisure programming strategies. Only two competencies had reported mean importance rankings below 3.50. These competencies were related to assessment, planning and evaluation and the leisure services profession. Overall, thirty-two (97%) of the professional preparation competencies included on the measurement instrument had a reported mean ranking that fell above the median value of the five-point scale used to measure perceived importance. Only one professional preparation competency Òcompetency in understanding the historical development of the leisure services professionÓ reported a mean ranking below the median value of the scale. Table 1 reports the mean responses in descending order for all professional preparation competencies included in the study. (Insert Table 1)

    Conceptual Foundations

    The conceptual foundations professional competency area was addressed by four competency descriptors. Descriptors were presented on the measurement instrument as follows: ÒUnderstanding the relationship between planning, design, development, and leisure behavior on the natural environmentÓ; ÒUnderstanding the significance of play, recreation, and leisureÓ; ÒUnderstanding the foundations of play, recreation, and leisureÓ; and ÒUnderstanding the significance of play, recreation, and leisure and human developmentÓ. Table 2 displays the mean responses for each competency developed to measure the perceived importance of professional preparation as it relates to conceptual foundations understanding. (Insert Table 2)

    Leisure Services Profession

    The leisure services profession professional competency area was addressed by four competency descriptors. Descriptors were presented on the measurement instrument as follows: ÒUnderstanding the roles and function of leisure programs in contemporary societyÓ, ÒUnderstanding the concept of professionalismÓ, ÒUnderstanding the historical development of the leisure services professionÓ, and ÒUnderstanding the current forces impacting the leisure professionÓ. Table 3 displays the mean responses for each competency developed to measure the perceived importance of professional preparation as it relates to leisure services profession understanding. (Insert Table 3)

    Leisure Services Delivery System

    The leisure services delivery system professional competency area was addressed by three competency descriptors. Descriptors were presented on the measurement instrument as follows: ÒUnderstanding of and ability to communicate concerns of the leisure service systemÓ; ÒUnderstanding the roles and interrelationships of the diverse services available to promote and enhance the leisure experience and the ability to use such leisure delivery servicesÓ; and ÒUnderstanding leisure service delivery practices as they apply to designing and operating leisure programs, services, and facilitiesÓ. Table 4 displays the mean responses for each competency developed to measure the perceived importance of professional preparation as it relates to leisure services delivery system understanding. (Insert Table 4)

    Leisure Programming Strategies

    The leisure programming strategies professional competency area was addressed by three competency descriptors. Descriptors were presented on the measurement instrument as follows: ÒDeveloping leisure programs for groupsÓ, ÒUnderstanding the components of programmingÓ and ÒUnderstanding of the concepts and methods of leisure resources used to facilitate participant involvementÓ. Table 5 displays the mean responses for each competency developed to measure the perceived importance of professional preparation as it relates to leisure programming strategy understanding. (Insert Table 5)

    Assessment, Planning and Evaluation

    The assessment, planning and evaluation professional competency area was addressed by seven competency descriptors. Descriptors were presented on the measurement instrument as follows: ÒUnderstanding the methods for assessing leisure resources, areas, facilities, and environmental impactsÓ; ÒUnderstanding of and ability to use computer software available for planning, assessment and/or evaluationÓ; ÒUnderstanding of and ability to develop, implement, and evaluate that goals and objectives of a leisure program have been metÓ; ÒUnderstanding how to interpret and apply research and evaluation methodology to leisure servicesÓ; ÒUnderstanding the procedures for proper design of leisure service areas and facilitiesÓ; ÒUnderstanding assessment procedures and techniquesÓ and ÒUnderstanding the methods for the evaluation of leisure programs and servicesÓ. Table 6 displays the mean responses for each competency developed to measure the perceived importance of professional preparation as it relates to assessment, planning and evaluation. (Insert Table 6)

    Administration and Management

    The administration and management professional competency area was addressed by eight competency descriptors. Descriptors were presented on the measurement instrument as follows: ÒUnderstanding administration and managementÓ; ÒUnderstanding the basic techniques of budgeting, finance, and fiscal accountabilityÓ; ÒUnderstanding of and the application of personnel management techniquesÓ; ÒUnderstanding of and ability to use computers to conduct administrative and management responsibilitiesÓ; ÒUnderstanding the methods and procedures related to the operation of resources, areas, and facilitiesÓ; ÒUnderstanding of and ability to communicate effectivelyÓ, ÒUnderstanding of and ability to use basic techniques in marketing, public relations, and promotion strategies to promote leisure servicesÓ; and ÒUnderstanding the basic techniques and strategies of marketingÓ. Table 7 displays the mean responses for each competency developed to measure the perceived importance of professional preparation as it relates to administration and management. (Insert Table 7)

    Legislative and Legal Aspects

    The legislative and legal aspects professional competency area was addressed by four competency descriptors. Descriptors were presented on the measurement instrument as follows: ÒUnderstanding risk management concepts and developing and implementing risk management conceptsÓ, ÒUnderstanding the legal foundations of leisure service delivery and the impact of legislative policy formation on leisure delivery systemsÓ, ÒUnderstanding the role of regulatory agents and ability to complyÓ, and ÒUnderstanding legal conceptsÓ. Table 8 displays the mean responses for each competency developed to measure the perceived importance of professional preparation as it relates to legislative and legal aspects. (Insert Table 8)

    Percentile Rankings for all Topical Classification Areas

    Each topical classification area had its own scale from which its composite mean and composite standard deviation was derived. This was due to the variable number of questions comprising each topical classification area. As a result, in order to facilitate a comparison of the perceived importance of each topical classification area as it relates to the successful provision of recreation, park resources and leisure-related services, the composite mean of each topical classification area was adjusted for scale range yielding a weighted mean. The adjustment to weighted means allowed for each weighted mean to be converted to a standard score. The standard score of each topical classification area was then converted to reflect its perceived percentile rank of importance. Table 9 reports the percentile rank of each topical classification area in descending order. (Insert Table 9).

    Perception of Professional Preparation

    Results indicated a mean of 2.80 (SD = .849) on the five-point scale provided to measure the perceived level at which recreation, park resources, and leisure services students were being prepared for professional practice.

    Perception of the Importance of CPRP Certification

    In order to descriptively measure the importance of CPRP certification in regard to professional practice, the author selected to collect information related to the role CPRP certification played in the hiring process of the agency in which the respondent was employed. This decision was made in an attempt to reduce personal bias toward the credential, and provide data to compare to research indicating that CPRP certification is receiving a strengthening embrace within the profession (Hubble & Taylor, 2003; Rossman & McKinney, 2000).

    Results indicated that 16 (5%) of the of the agencies in which respondents were employed required CPRP certification for obtaining employment, 130 (43%) agencies indicated preference toward the credential in their hiring process, 138 (46%) agencies did not consider the credential in their hiring process, and 19 (6%) had no knowledge of the credential.

    Conclusions Results from this study indicated that individuals preparing for a career in public parks and recreation should receive professional preparation in all topical classification areas outlined in the Professional Competencies (series standards 8.00) of the Standards and Evaluative Criteria for Baccalaureate Programs in Recreation, Park Resources, and Leisure Services (NRPA, 2000). The topical classification area perceived as requiring the most breadth of understanding was administration and management. This would indicate that academicians should allocate the greatest breadth of professional preparation in this area, ensuring upon graduation that students possess the following:

    · strong communication skills (e.g., technical writing, speech, audio visual);

    · understanding of administration and management concepts (e.g., organizational behavior, accountability, interpersonal relations, decision making strategies);

    · understanding of techniques related to budget, finance, and fiscal accountability;

    · ability to make application of marketing, public relations and other promotion techniques and strategies;

    · understanding of the administrative operational methods and procedures;

    · ability to make application of personnel management techniques (e.g., job analysis, recruitment selection, training, career development, evaluation) and;

    · strong computer skills (e.g., word processing, spread sheet development, specialized recreation-related software).

    Results also indicate that academicians should include within their curriculums course work that ensures the following student learning objectives:

    · understanding of the concepts of professionalism (e.g. role of a profession, role of professional organizations, responsibilities of a professional, professional competency, delivery of leisure services, resources available for professional development);

    · ability to develop leisure programs;

    · understanding of group dynamics, group processes, and leadership techniques;

    · ability to develop outcome oriented goals and objectives for individuals and groups;

    · understanding of and ability to develop and implement risk management plans

    · understanding of current issues, trends and future projections impacting the profession;

    · understanding and ability to evaluate that the goals of a leisure program are being met; and

    · understanding of the roles and functions of leisure in contemporary society.

    Based on the perceived Òbelow-averageÓ mean reported in relation to the median of the five-point scale used to measure perceived professional preparation it could be concluded that many professional preparation programs may need to develop more stringent program exit criteria beyond the traditional use of minimum grade point averages. (e.g., exit exams). Given the reported frequency of 146 (48%) agencies from the study sample requiring or preferring CPRP certification in their hiring process and current CPRP eligibility requirements it can be concluded that students considering a career in public parks and recreation would be best served by attending a NRPA/AALR accredited program. This would allow the student to make application to sit for the CPRP exam immediately upon graduation. Although research has suggested that disparities between accredited and nonaccredited programs may not be directly a result of educational inadequacy among nonaccredited programs, but the inability of smaller programs to meet organizational and operational accreditation standards (Longsdorf, 2001; Ricciardo & Longsdorf, 2002), students graduating from accredited programs are provided an incremental advantage in the employment market providing they successfully obtain certification.

    References

    Baumgarter, T. A., Strong, C. H., & Hensley, L. D. (2002). Conducting and reading research in health and human performance. (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

    Hubble, S. & Taylor, M. (2003). Certifiably worth it: The benefits of certification are endless. Parks and Recreation, 38(1), 35-39.

    Longsdorf, E. L. (2001). Faculty perceptions of the academic preparation of recreation, parks and leisure services students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH.

    Lundegren, H.M., & Farrell, P. (1985). Evaluation for leisure service managers. New York: Saunders College.

    National Recreation and Park Association. (1975). Standards and evaluative criteria for recreation, leisure services and resource curricula baccalaureate and masters degree programs. Ashburn, VA: Author.

    National Recreation and Park Association. (2000). Standards and evaluative criteria for baccalaureate programs in recreation, park resources and leisure services. Ashburn, VA: Author.

    Parr, M. G. (1996). A cognitive approach to understanding the conceptual structure of the parks, recreation, and leisure services field. Schole, 11, 8-22.

    Ricciardo, J. & Longsdorf, E. (2002). An examination of variables distinguishing accredited from nonaccredited recreation, park resources and leisure services programs. In R. Schuster (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2002 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium. (Gen. Tech Rep. NE-302, p. 104-108). U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

    Rossman, J. R., & McKinney, W. R. (2000). Official study guide for the certified park and recreation professional examination. Ashburn, VA: National Recreation and Park Association.

    Table 1 Individual Competency Mean rankings
    Individual Competency Mean Rankings Competency	Mean	SD
    Understanding of and ability to communicate effectively	4.57	.656
    Understanding administration and management concepts	4.53	.602
    Understanding the basic techniques of budgeting, finance, and fiscal accountability	4.52	.699
    Understanding the concepts of professionalism	4.34	.763
    Developing leisure programs for groups	4.29	.750
    Understanding the components of programming	4.27	.741
    Understanding of and ability to use basic techniques in marketing, public relations, and promotion strategies to promote leisure services	4.23	.732
    Understanding risk management concepts and developing and implementing risk management plans.	4.20	.734
    Understanding the methods and procedures related to the operation of resources, areas, and facilities	4.13	.756
    Understanding of and the application of personnel management techniques	4.13	.808
    Understanding of and ability to use computers to conduct administrative and management responsibilities	4.11	.794
    Understanding the current forces impacting the leisure profession	4.09	.769
    Understanding of and ability to develop, implement, and evaluate that the goals and objectives of a leisure program or service have been met	4.06	.732
    Understanding the roles and functions of leisure service programs in contemporary society	4.05	.836
    Understanding the basic techniques and strategies of marketing	4.04	.801
    Understanding the methods for assessing leisure resources, areas, facilities, and environmental impacts	3.98	.707
    Understanding the methods for the evaluation of leisure programs and services	3.92	.716
    Understanding the procedures for proper design of leisure service areas and facilities	3.92	.761
    Understanding the significance of play, recreation, and leisure	3.92	.859
    Understanding and ability to use computer software available for planning, assessment and/or evaluation	3.91	.829
    Understanding of the concepts and methods of leisure resources to facilitate participant involvement	3.91	.790
    Understanding leisure service delivery practices as they apply to designing and operating leisure programs, services and facilities	3.89	.768
    Understanding of and ability to communicate concerns of the leisure service system	3.85	.878
    Understanding the relationships between planning, design, development, and leisure behavior on the natural environment	3.84	.801
    Understanding of the role of regulatory agents and ability to comply	3.80	.827
    Understanding the significance of play, recreation, and leisure as it relates to human growth and development	3.78	.904
    Understanding the roles and interrelationships of the diverse services available to promote and enhance the leisure experience and the ability to use such leisure delivery services	3.73	.875
    Understanding legal concepts	3.72	.853
    Understanding the conceptual foundations of play, recreation, and leisure	3.70	.906
    Understanding the legal foundations of leisure service delivery and the impact of legislative policy formation on leisure delivery systems	3.61	.861
    Understanding assessment procedures and techniques	3.57	.818
    Understanding how to interpret and apply research and evaluation methodology to leisure services	3.29	.880
    Understanding the historical development of the leisure services profession	2.94	.889
    Note: Mean based on five-point scale (1 = Not at All Important, 5 = Very Important)
    N = 303

    Table 2 Conceptual Foundation Competency Mean Rankings
    Competency Mean Rankings	Mean	SD
    Understand Play Recreation and Leisure	3.92	.859
    Understand Plan, Desig, Behavior in Natural Environ	3.84	.801
    Understand Play Recreation Leisure with Human Growth	3.78	.904
    Understand Foundations of Play Recreation and Leisure	3.70	.906
    Note: Mean based on five-point scale (1 = Not at All Important, 5 = Very Important)
    N = 303

    Table 3 Leisure Service Profession Competency Mean Rankings
    Competency Mean Rankings									Mean	SD
    Understand Current Forces									4.09	.769
    Understand Professional Role in Society									4.05	.836
    Understand Historical Development Services									2.94	.889
    Note: Mean based on five-point scale (1 = Not at All Important, 5 = Very Important)
    N = 303

    Table 4 Leisure Service Delivery Sytem Competency Mean Rankings
    Competency Mean Rankings									Mean	SD
    Service Delivery Practices									3.89	.768
    Communicate Delivery Services Concerns									3.85	.878
    Promote and Enhance Diverse Delivery Services									3.73	.875
    Note: Mean based on five-point scale (1 = Not at All Important, 5 = Very Important)
    N = 303

    Table 5 Leisure Programming Strategies Competency Mean Rankings
    Competency Mean Rankings									Mean	SD
    Programs for Groups									4.29	.750
    Components of Programming									4.27	.741
    Facilitate participant Involvement									3.91	.790
    Note: Mean based on five-point scale (1 = Not at All Important, 5 = Very Important)
    N = 303

    Table 6 Assessment, Planning and Evaluation Competency Mean Rankings
    Competency Mean Rankings									Mean	SD
    Assess Goals/Objecives of Program Services									4.57	.656
    Assess Areas and Facilities									4.06	.732
    Evaluate Programs and Services									3.98	.707
    Design Areas and Facilities									3.92	.761
    Computer Software Assessment Programs									3.91	.829
    Understand Assessment Procedures									3.57	.818
    Interpretation of Research Metholology									3.29	.880
    Note: Mean based on five-point scale (1 = Not at All Important, 5 = Very Important)
    N = 303

    Table 7 Adminstration and Management Competency Mean Rankings
    Competency Mean Rankings									Mean	SD
    Understand Communications									4.57	.656
    Understand Management Concepts									4.53	.602
    Understand Budget and Finance									4,52	.699
    Understand Marketing Promotions									4.23	.732
    Understand Areas and Facilities									4.13	.756
    Understand Personnel Management									4.13	.808
    Understand Computers and Management									4.11	.794
    Understand Marketing Strategies									4.04	.801
    Note: Mean based on five-point scale (1 = Not at All Important, 5 = Very Important)
    N = 303

    Table 8 Legislative and Legal Aspects
    Understand Competency Mean Rankings									Mean	SD
    Understand Risk Management									4.20	.734
    Understand Regulatory Compliance									3.80	.827
    Understand Legal Concepts									3.72	.853
    Understand Deliver Service Issues									3.61	.861
    Note: Mean based on five-point scale (1 = Not at All Important, 5 = Very Important)
    N = 303

    Table 9 Topical Classification Area Percentile Ranks
    Topical Classification Area Composite
    Classification	Mean	Weighted Mean	Standard Score	zValue	Percentage	Percentage Rank
    Administration	34.26	1.67	1.99	.0233	2.33	97.67
    Program Strategies	12.47	1.04	.07	.4721	47.21	52.79
    Profession	15.42	.963	-.15	.4404	44.04	44.04
    Delivery System	11.47	.955	-.17	.4325	43.25	43.25
    Legislative Legal	15.33	.957	-.17	.4325	43.25	43.25
    Assess, Plan Evaluate	26.65	.951	-.18	.4286	42.86	42.86
    Foundations	15.24	.552	-1.39	.0823	8.23	8.23
    Note: Areas under standard normal curve for values of z to compute percentile rank were identified from Fisher, R.A. & Yates, F. (1974). Statistical tables for biological, agricultural and medical research. (6th ed.). In Hinkle, D.E., Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S.G. (1994). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences. (3rd ed.). Geneva, IL: Houghton Mifflin.