A Lingering Question

The authors cited no clear review of literature, however; the authors used appropriate reference in the introduction. The authors stated, “Existing literature on the impact of athletics on student performance has concentrated on individual-level analysis.” The research is shallow if because it did not state the academic performance of nonathletic students.

The authors cited “a considerable body of research indicates that student participation in extracurricular activities as athletics minimizes delinquency (Landers & Landers, 1978)” to support the positive impact of athletics on students (p. 799, introduction, para.2). This is strong evidence, however; this reference is very old, and activities of 1978 are different from those of 2004 (p. 799, introduction, para.1). The evidence “a person might be excused if, upon visiting a school, he or she concluded that the primary objective of the school system was to field an athletic team (Coleman, 1961)” is weak to support the many athletic programs in public schools (p. 799, introduction, para.1). The authors stated, “Institutionalizing athletics may signal students that
athletics are as important as or more important that academic performance” (p. 800 introduction, para.6) and no supporting evidence.

The data came from Texas school districts covering form 1997 to 1998. The authors used “Texas is well known as a state that is fanatical about athletics in general and football in particular (Bissinger, 1991; Gent, 1973; Jenkins, 1972)”, to support the choice of Texas school districts as a source of data (p. 800, data and method, para.1). The authors did not mention sampling procedure, sample size, power, precision, and research
design. Thus, it is difficult for the audience to analyze the research. Dependent variables and the independent variables were not concisely stated. The research methodology is not clear to an average audience like an athletic player. The primary audience is educational policy makers, because the authors published it in the Review of Policy Research journal.

There is some limitation of bias. In referring to subjects, the authors stated “black and Latino students” (p.802 data and method, iv. para.3). The authors capitalized Latino, but not ‘black’. According to American Psychological Association (2010, p. 75), when referring to racial and ethnic groups, use capitalized proper noun. The authors used color for the Black race, and region for Latino Race and this is not consistency. The
authors used minority without a modifier-racial or ethnic before the noun (American Psychological Association, 2010, p. 75).

The authors mentioned control variables. The dependent variables were students’ attendants, basic skills, and average SAT and ACTS scores. Independent variables include the per student athletics budget of the district, and percentage of African American and Latino students in Texas district schools. Poverty and total per student expenditures were controlled. Hypothesis 1 is the relationship between athletic expenditures and student performance, which agreed with the research topic. The authors used the T-Score to analyze the data, but not full discussion about the distributed mentioned.

The authors presented the data in table form and explained with a short narrative. The authors did not begin by relating findings back to the overall purpose of the study.

Findings

• Hypothesis 1 is positive, but not statistically significant. The authors stated that the results are most consistent with the null hypothesis, but did not go further to show the consistency.

• Athletics can influence student performance on basic exam performance. Table 2 results show a negative Texas Assessment of Academic Kills [TAAS] relationship between athletic expenditures and student performance.

• Strong negative relationship exists between athletic budgets and student performance on SAT and ACT examinations. From the article, “the athletic budgets can have a can have a maximum impact of 45 points on SAT or 1.2 points on the ACT” (p. 803, findings, para.3).

• School districts with larger athletic budgets have student bodies that are less likely to participate in college admission tests and less likely to score highly on these tests.

 In conclusion, the authors stated that existing literature shows a positive relationship between athletics and student performance, but when the analyses is moved to a district level, different results are obtained. In addition, the authors mentioned that when school district spends money on athletics, academic performance is low. Furthermore, the authors suggested that additional research merits the impact of athletic expenditures on the overall academic performance. The authors based the conclusions on logical findings. The recommendation for future studies was adequately stated. This article was well organized, but not in-depth. The sampling procedure and size were not clearly stated. Overall, the not meet the quality of a scholarly article.

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3566508/A-lingering-question-of-priorities.html

References

(American Psychological Association 2009 Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association)American Psychological Association (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author

(Meier K J Eller W S Marchbanks Iii M P Robinson S Polinard S Wrinkle R D 2004 Lingering Question ofPriorities: athletic Budgets and Academic Performance Revisited)Meier, K. J., Eller, W. S., MarchbanksIII, M. P., Robinson, S., Polinard, S., & Wrinkle, R. D. (2004). A Lingering Question of Priorities:athletic Budgets and Academic Performance Revisited. Review of Policy Research, 21(6), 799-807. doi:10.1111/j.1541-1338.2004.00109.x