This commentary responds to an invitation to discuss sport management from the viewpoint of an administrator. My thoughts are segmented into two streams: (a) the interface of a sports-minded public and sport management and (b) the listing of a few issues and concerns confronting sport management today. The first recognizes the high profile of sport in American society and the rising gross national sport product (GNSP), which have placed sport management programs in the enviable position of visibility and attention. The second plays on several themes: continuing to improve the knowledge and research base, establishing an independent identity while sharing technology within HPER programs, and being sensitive to a growing trend toward more graduate students entering from fields outside sport, leisure, and Wellness.
Dorothy B. Zakrajsek
Grace Goc-Karp and Dorothy B. Zakrajsek
This study determined and compared the planning models taught in preservice physical education (theoretical) with those practiced in junior high school physical education (reality). Empirical and ethnographic data were collected through a survey of college professors (n = 59), close-ended (n = 36) and open-ended surveys of teachers (n = 28), and a nonparticipant observation study (n = 4). The results indicated that the theoretical model focused on planning for student learning whereas the reality model focused on planning for teaching. The personal philosophy of the teachers, coaching commitments, the teachers’ routines of planning and teaching, and the students’ reactions were major influences on how teachers planned and why they planned. Reasons for lack of transfer of the planning model from theory into practice are discussed and suggestions for further investigation are made.