COSMA Annual Report 2024 - 25

Brief Explanation of Assessment Tools

Students enrolled in SM 2010 Introduction to Sport Management are required work in groups of 7 and prepare a presentation centered around where they see themselves working in sport. First, students were to communicate with one another and discuss what are they saw themselves working in sport (High School, college, professional, non-profit, apparel company, area of the world…) Second, they were to determine group members based on similar career interests. Lastly, students in groups must prepare a 15–20-minute presentation detailing an overview of their career interests including a typical career path for leaders in that area, salary range, current internship and job openings and other information pertinent to their career interest. Groups must provide fact-based reasoning as well as provide analytical evidence to back their thoughts.

At the end of the semester, one-question self-assessment survey is administered (“collaborate with others in diverse group settings to promote teamwork and inclusion in sport” with a 5-point scale answer), which is an indirect measure.

Interpretation of the Results

The Student Assessment Results Summary Table shows that students performed well (80% and 83%; met and slightly exceeded expectations) on the presentation and self-assessment. Like other classes in Sport Management, students had multiple in-class reviews of expectations (almost every session) of the presentation.

Action Plan: Assessment-based Changes to the Course

Two immediate assessment-based changes will occur. First, the presentation will be moved toward the end of the semester as opposed to just past the midterm. Given this is the first class sport management students take, additional time to gain an understanding of career options is critical for the success of the presentation.

Second, while we discussed the presentation and requirements often, we plan to have class sessions dedicated to the presentation each week (or every other week). This will allow for better determination of progress for each group.

Third, we will have those teaching the class more involved in determining groups. Previously, students were allowed to determine their own group members. In both fall and spring semester, it was clear that students chose group members based on those who sat those to them or who they knew. This meant that some students were presenting on careers they may not be interesting in for the sake of being in a group with friends.

An additional plan is to incorporate a more detailed survey (indirect measure). We went with a simple and quick one question. However, we believe more detail would be beneficial. In addition, administering the survey in class as opposed to online and further explaining the survey may be beneficial

This assignment may or may not be the best for this course. While the group presentation is beneficial, with such a large class each semester, there may be better ways to design the presentation such as shorten the time and focus on career path. For example, rather than 15-20 minutes on a college athletic director, have groups present on the typical career path for those who are current athletic directors as well as one or two specific examples. We will spend some time reviewing other options.

Brief Explanation of Assessment Tools

SM 3100 – Sport Event and Facility Management is designed to provide students with information and practical knowledge and skill competencies needed for facility and event management within the context of sport activities. Among the topics explored included sport facility and venue trends, planning and designing sport facilities, and facility and event operations related to sport facility and event management.

For the SWOT Analysis assignment, the students must work with a group to identify the strengths, weaknesses, objectives, and threats of the BGSU Athletic Department. Prior to this assignment, the students have listened to a lecture on what a SWOT Analysis is and how one can be conducted. They are given guidelines, and we do one collectively as a class. Following that, the students work in groups of 3-4 to perform at complete SWOT Analysis. They must identify five strengths, weaknesses, objectives, and threats. Then, they must use the five items from the first section and list the ways in which the athletic department can enhance or improve each of the previously identified items. The students must present their assessment to the class.

The case studies align with the chapter topics. There is a scenario provided to the students and they have specific questions they must answer that integrates various elements from the assigned topic. The students must use the material to clearly argue their point in written form.

Interpretation of the Results

As shown on the Student Assessment Results Summary Table, students did better at completing the SWOT in class (91%) and giving their presentation on their SWOT analysis (91%) than completing their case study homework assignments (65%). For both, the students who did not meet expectations was due to their failure to complete the assignment rather than not understanding the material.

The indirect measure was a brief survey given to students in the spring sections asking them how they perceived their written and verbal contributions to their assignments and the SWOT analysis. All students who participated in the survey (n=48) all rated themselves a 4 or a 5 on a 5-point likert scale.

Action Plan: Assessment-based Changes to the Course

As the assessment data shows, the students need to be improve on their case study assignment grades. While roughly 2/3 of the class met the expectations, the lower grade on the remaining third of the class was due to the students having several missing assignments. In order to motivate students to do the assignments, which will help them learn the content, I will brainstorm different incentives or ways to engage the students to actually complete the work. One possibility would be to clarify why these assignments are important to their course knowledge and how it translates to the industry. Additionally, I could offer students a choice in assignments. Instead of multiple case studies, students could do a large paper. This would give students a sense of agency over their assignments while achieving the same learning objectives.

Brief Explanation of Assessment Tools

Students in SM 3650 Foundations of Sport Psychology work in small groups to develop a Sport Psychology Workbook. This is a theory-to-practice assignment in which students apply sport psychology theory; present find real-life examples illustrating workbook topics; and create practical advice for coaches, administrators, and athletes. The workbook is broken into five chapters that are submitted individually approximately every three weeks throughout the semester. Students work in small groups to develop the written and oral versions of their workbooks. One chapter of this workbook focuses on group dynamics (including leadership, cohesion, and group motivation).

Each group selects an audience (e.g., administrators, coaches, athletes, parents) and a competitive level (e.g., high school, college). They also select the primary topic and theory guiding their chapter (e.g., a leadership theory or team cohesion theory). After briefly describing the conceptual framework, most of the chapter focuses on describing strategies and/or exercises that can be used to enhance that attribute. Students submit a written version of the workbook chapter and conduct a 10-minute group presentation of highlights from their chapter. Students also completed a quiz on the reading for the class session focused on leadership. (The textbook is Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology by Robert Weinberg and Daniel Gould.)

As an indirect assessment, students rated each of their small group peers on effort and engagement with the development of the workbook chapter (e.g., preparedness for in-class group work, participation in group communications, contributions to submitted chapter). Scores ranged from 1 (minimal engagement) to 5 (fully engaged).

Interpretation of the Results

As shown in the above table of results, on three of the four assessments, the students exceeded or met expectations. The students readily met expectations on their quiz and the oral presentation of leadership related content. However, their written work falls short of expectations. Common instructor feedback on the assignments emphasized that students struggled to find appropriate academic sources (i.e., they tended to rely on google searches). Students’ grammar, punctuation, coherence, and organization often was lacking.

Action Plan: Assessment-based Changes to the Course

Clear and concise writing consistently is a challenge for many current college students. As a faculty we have had, and will continue to have, conversations about how to help students improve their writing skills. One strategy for improvement across the curriculum is to select certain courses in the curriculum to be writing intensive and in which faculty provide detailed feedback to multiple drafts of papers.

The structure of this class poses challenges when attempting to work with students on their writing since their major projects are done in small groups. However, a number of strategies can be implemented.

• Allow students to revise and resubmit their first workbook chapter to gain additional
  feedback on their writing.
• Have the class GA work more closely with students in reviewing feedback on each
  chapter.
• Encourage students to use the Writing Commons where they can get in-depth
  individualized feedback and assistance.

Brief Explanation of Assessment Tools

Students enrolled in SM 4500 - Sport Revenues and Expenditures (offered online in both fall 2024 and spring 2025) are required work in groups of 3 (groups determined by professor) and complete the final assignment (8th of 8 assignments) for the class. Each of the first 7 assignments individual assignments. The paper is to focus on how finance influences current issues in sports. Students were informed details about the assignment often throughout the semester, but groups were not sent to students until 3 weeks before the paper was due. First, students were to communicate with one another and discuss what how they saw finance in current topics. Given the news, this year it was relatively easy (NIL, professional salaries, impact of Caitlin Clark…) Second, as a group, they were to determine a “leader” of the group who would serve as the one who organizes the group plan and meeting times. Groups must provide fact-based reasoning as well as provide analytical evidence to back their thoughts.

At the end of the semester, one-question self-assessment survey is administered (“collaborate with others in diverse group settings to promote teamwork and inclusion in sport” with a 5-point scale answer), which is an indirect measure.

Interpretation of the Results

The Student Assessment Results Summary Table shows that students performed very well (96% and 96%; exceeded expectations) on the paper and self-assessment. Given this was an online class, students were sent multiple announcements, reminders and provided well detailed written and video instructions of the expectations.

Action Plan: Assessment-based Changes to the Course

It was very clear that the multiple announcements and videos explaining the assignment and expectations, starting the first week of classes was very valuable to student success. This was much more effective than a simple announcement at the start of a class session. We plan to use this type of getting information across in our in-person class as well.

We plan to keep having the professor assign groups. This seems to work better for students as well as having students select a “leader” sets the stage for the assignment. In the fall of 2025, we will try assigning the groups earlier in the semester to allow the students to communicate even more frequently.

As with SM 2010, an additional plan is to incorporate a more detailed survey (indirect measure). Fort both SM 2010 and 4500, we went with a simple and quick one question survey. However, we believe more detail would be beneficial. For SM 4500, we believe it will be beneficial to incorporate open ended questions as well.

Brief Explanation of Assessment Tools

Students enrolled in HMSL 6400 – Governance of Sport Organizations were required to complete a semester-long group writing assignment, i.e., Governance Memorandum. Table 1 is the grading rubric that was used as a direct measure of SLO 3 (“Critically evaluate Sport Administration topics through writing”). During Week 7, student groups were assigned to different governance contexts, i.e., realignment/relocation of sport leagues and competition/collaboration policy of sport governing bodies. They could choose specific sport organizations analyzed in the governance contexts. The combinations of the strategic contexts/organizations were Realignment/Team Relocation for WNBA, Competition/Collaboration between ACC/Big10, Realignment/Team Relocation for MLB, and Competition/Collaboration between MLS/USL. A student survey was also conducted to assess group performance as an indirect measure of the SLO at the end of the semester.

Table 1: Grading Rubrics for Governance Memorandum

Interpretation of the Results

The Student Assessment Results Summary Table shows that students performed well (100%; exceed expectations) on the Memorandum (score range 88 - 96) and group performance survey (average score = 9.5/10). The lowest score (88) for the direct measure was awarded to the group working on the Realignment and Team Relocation of MLB while the group examined the strategic alliance between MLS and USL earned the highest score (96). Although everyone in the class reached to the SLO benchmark successfully, the comparison between the two groups with the highest and lowest score may provide more insights (see Table 2). The grading rubric indicates that the group with the lowest score somewhat struggled with “Overall Writing” prong for the lack of unity and conceptual flow (earned 15 out of 20). This would be an inherent problem in the group setting where students aim to complete different sections individually without coordinated efforts. In contrast, the group with the highest score performed well on “Overall Writing” (earned 18 out of 20) as the students seemingly checked overall flow and unity of the group paper.

Table 2: Comparing Groups with Best and Worst Performance

Action Plan: Assessment-based Changes to the Course

The data suggests that the coordination among individual members would be one of the most significant determinants of group performance. Some measures might be implemented for future writing assignments in group settings.

• Individual members would be allowed to split different parts of writing while their responsible sections are clearly identified. This will likely strengthen respective group members’ accountability and hopefully facilitate more interactions feedback among peers.
• Unity and streamlined flow of writing may become an independent prong in the rubric to emphasize the magnitude of unified voice and coordination in the group writing. 
• Use of Large-Language Model Artificial Intelligence (LLM-AI) to provide more unity in writing, at least in the final draft stage. Students may need to submit all input-output information and framing questions so that such technologically friendly learning would still require the critical thinking component.

Brief Explanation of Assessment Tools

HMLS 6410 – Gender, Sexuality, and Sport addresses contemporary issues and necessitates that students use critical thinking skills to evaluate academic articles about many controversial topics. They are encouraged to engage in civil and respectful conversation as students present divergent perspectives and opinions. One of their major assignments is a review of the literature on a topic of their choice focused on content related to gender and sexuality in sport.

For the review of literature, students are directed to: Search the research databases and relevant text or academic books and find at least 25 scholarly sources addressing your topic. From these sources, develop a paper (approximately 10-15 pages) that summarizes and organizes major findings, highlights essential articles, critiques the research in this area, and lays the foundation for continued work in this area.

As an indirect assessment, students’ class discussion leadership was assessed. The class is discussion-oriented and students lead the class discussion on one topic during the semester. Students select a topic on the class outline and guide the class through a discussion of that topic. They prepare a brief introduction to the topic, questions to ask the class, current examples, and any other information that will help the class understand the issues related to that topic

Interpretation of the Results

As shown in the above table of results, on both assessments, the students met or exceeded expectations. That said, about half of the students’ reviews of literature were in the B range. While the students orally can convey information from the readings and support/refute various positions as we discussed current issues in sport, they need additional support to enhance their writing skills.

Action Plan

Helping students better develop their writing skills is a challenge across all classes. Faculty have discussed this issue often. Some strategies that may benefit students include:

• Have students complete many short writing assignments throughout the semester and provide detailed timely feedback
• Build in opportunities to review and resubmit written assignments throughout the semester
• Encourage students to write papers by hand rather than depend on devices that offer grammar check, etc.
• Require students to take a graduate level writing class offered through the English Dept.