COSMA Annual Report 2023-24

Sport Management (Undergraduate) Student Learning Outcomes Matrix – Academic Year 2023-24

Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes for SM 3050 Sport Promotions and Sales: AY 2023-24

Brief Explanation of Assessment Tools

Students enrolled in SM 3050 – Sport Promotions and Sales were assessed on SLO #2: students will apply knowledge toward quality solutions to complex sport industry problems. The course was designed to meet this learning objective through a) case analysis and project development discussions during class, complemented by b) assignments and a final project that was a comprehensive marketing plan for a sport organization.

The in-class discussion around case analyses and sales/promotions activations were a primary tool for positioning students to brainstorm and develop solutions to marketing questions in an applied and practical analysis of current scenarios in sport marketing. Attendance/participation was required to meet the learning objectives nested in the work-shop style classroom and so a grade for participation that captured attendance was a point-based assignment in the gradebook.

Other assessments that were designed to accompany classroom discussion in supporting student’s ability to apply knowledge to industry issues included:

• A weekly/unit discussion board in Canvas, for which the content was co-created by students
• A weekly/unit discussion board in Perusall, for which students applied the unit’s principles to assigned content
• Module reading quizzes on the book chapters that corresponded to the units that comprised course modules (3050 is broken down into four modules, three of which are content modules and the fourth is built around integrating trends in the sector into group Marketing Plan presentations)
• Sales and Promotions Case Study
• Sport Organization Marketing SWOT Analysis
• Marketing Plan

The primary assignment that supported student’s capacities to apply knowledge to complex problems in sport and that assessed those applications was the culminating course term project: the Marketing Plan Term Project, which included the SWOT Analysis as a section that was produced as a mid-term check-in assignment for the full project. For the Marketing Plan Term Project, students elaborate on the current state of a sport organization’s market position and sales and promotions activities, highlighting gaps in the organization’s marketing strategies and practices.

The Fall 2023 iteration of SM 3050 did not collect the Case Study or SWOT Analysis as a formal assignment/direct assessment; those deliverables were incorporated into class work-shop prompts for that fall semester. In the spring semester of 2024, the Case Study assignment was formalized as a group presentation and the SWOT analysis was combined with the organizational description component of the Marketing Plan and parsed out as a direct assessment that included an oral presentation in class and a written submission. Making the Case Study and SWOT Analysis assignments standalone/graded submissions performed well and will be retained as a change to course design - the assignments provided focus and offered a chance for peer and instructor feedback on the group’s direction for the Marketing Plan Term Project.

The Case Study, SWOT Analysis, and Marketing Plan were designed as group projects to parallel working conditions in the field. A component of each of the assessments was a rating system by which each group member evaluated their peer’s contribution and engagement to the assignment presentation/submission (as a grade or point assignment), and included a self-rating of their contribution and engagement. The rating system was a feature of meeting the course SLO via the assignments: solving group-work dynamics in constructing organizational strategies are a complex problem in the industry.

Interpretation of the Results

The 2023/24 semesters combined to an observable sample of 52 students (the SWOT assignment was only formally assessed in the spring semester, n=24). Data are provided for student performance on the assignments that were most central to meeting SLO 2: Apply knowledge toward quality solutions to complex sport industry problems.

As shown in the results table, student performance on the assignments that most directly mapped onto the SLO 2 (the SWOT Analysis presentation and written submission and the Marketing Plan Term Project presentation and written submission) exceeded expectations. Across the cascading assignments, students describe, evaluate, and elaborate on an organization’s marketing mix and strategy, proposing unique solutions to evolving market conditions and trends in sport. 50 of 52 students earned a B or higher on the comprehensive assessment, with the two observations missing the mark coming from the fall semester. Student performance on the SWOT Analysis, which was added to the syllabus as a graded assessment in the spring semester, might have supported performance on the Marketing Plan Term Project in the spring. 21 of 24 students earned a grade of a B or higher on the SWOT Analysis standalone assignment in Spring 2024, exceeding expectations for performance with 88% of students making the mark.

The other assignments designed to assess the primary learning objective of applying knowledge to complex issues were the student’s report of the group processes on the three major course projects (captured by rating group members on their contributions) and the student’s engagement in the classroom workshops (captured by a participation score). Student reports of their peer’s collaboration on group projects, submitted with their assessment of their own contributions to the groupwork for each of the 3 major course assignments, indicated that performance exceeded expectations. The 52 observations for the peer and self ratings on group performance included three unique reports per student in the Spring 2024 (n=24), totaling 72 unique reports captured in the metric from the spring students (Case Study and SWOT Analysis were not assessed in the Fall 2023 semester). In the set of peer and self reports across conditions in the 2023/2024 academic year, 49 of 52 students were rated by peers as exceeding expectations for performing groupwork.

Student engagement in classroom workshops was evaluated on attendance and engagement in problem-solving scenarios prompted in class. Students did not perform well on this assessment, indicating that class attendance might be the prominent barrier to meeting learning objectives. Only 75% of students (39 of 52) met the threshold of earning a B on their participation/attendance grade.

Action Plan: Assessment-based Changes to the Course

As indicated by the assessment metrics across the 2023/2024 academic year, students performed beyond expectations on submitted assignments and on working with group members to solve complex problems in sport, with a focus on marketing strategies and practices in this course. The SLO evaluated in this frame: apply knowledge toward quality solutions to complex sport industry problems, was met by the primary indicators. Though students performed well on the assessments, there are some changes to assignment design that might help maintain and elevate student takeaways in future iterations of the course:

• The organizations that students selected to conduct their SWOT Analysis and Marketing Plan were narrow in scope. Where students were able to choose any organization in sport to work on, their tendency to select familiar professional organizations or high exposure college programs as the subject of their Marketing Plan limited the scope of discussion and analysis application. Though the depth and conceptual development in student submissions reflected quality applications of the principles, concepts, and topics in sales and promotion, how those were applied across sectors of the sport industry was incomplete. To generate a more robust set of analyses that cover other segments of the industry (e.g., youth sport, low-level college sport, mega sport, equipment and merchandising, or media), the organizations students select to work on should be bound by selection parameters that capture a broader swath of marketing strategies and practices in the industry.
• An additional component of an action plan for the assignments will be to incorporate an AI analysis and descriptions of the chosen organization’s marketing plan as a section of the term project to mitigate instances in which students reported AI-generated ideas/text in their project submission. The included section will require that students generate, summarize, and interpret an AI marketing plan that they then incorporate into their elaboration on sales and promotions for their chosen organization.

The participation/attendance assessment that captured student progress toward the learning objective via in-class workshops indicated that attendance is a major barrier and thus the in-class deliverables are underperforming. Informal student feedback from the Fall 2023 semester asked for the in-class work to be submitted as a direct assessment, where points are assigned to what a group produces in response to the scenario prompt. A remedy that might encourage attendance is to collect and grade group work generated in class randomly or incrementally across the semester, where groups submit what they produce for class workshops and discussion. Additionally, the participation/attendance grade was cumulative, thus reported to students only at the end of the semester; breaking the grade up into staged feedback and point assignments along the Modules or topics schedule could help students be aware of the penalty for missing the workshops.

Brief Explanation of Assessment Tools

Direct Assessment: The final major project in this class is titled, Removing Barriers. This assignment addresses several learning outcomes by requiring students to select a group of people often marginalized or overlooked in physical activity and (a) introduce why it is important to be inclusive of this group in physical activity, (b) describe common barriers affecting this group of people, and (c) develop a plan for a fictional physical activity establishment to become more inclusive.

Indirect assessment #1: Assessment tool: Rate your group members on the following:
(1=unacceptable/minimal involvement; 5=excellent/maximal involvement)

1. How involved was this group member during on-line communications (e-mail, discussion board, cloud, etc.)?
2. How involved was this group member during in-class group discussions?
3. How prepared was this group member to discuss content during group meetings?
4. How much did this group member contribute content beyond what was in the textbook (e.g., find examples, exercises, etc.)
5. How much did this group member contribute to the completion of this section?

Indirect assessment #2: reference list contents. Scored 1-5 on the number of appropriate scholarly sources cited.

Interpretation of the Results

In the Breaking Barriers Presentations, the majority of the students did a great job of using critical thinking to propose a working plan to include marginalized groups in fitness facilities and some even provided options for outdoor inclusivity as well. The students did a fine job of using logic and supportive research to make their points clear and to connect their suggestions to the material learned in class. Twenty-seven of the 35 students being evaluated interacted with those they presented with and engaged in questions of depth and talked through problem-solving or the process of navigating future issues they may face within the proposed plan.

Action Plan: Assessment-based Changes to the Course

The structure of the presentations was consistent, but students could include more scholarly references throughout. This can be done by teaching the students where to search and how to identify sources in class. I can even include an assignment to help students practice identifying and locating these kinds of sources.

Brief Explanation of Assessment Tools

Students enrolled in SM 4270 – Sport in Contemporary U.S. Society learn to evaluate current issues in the sport industry through analyses of scholarly and professional literature. This was the first time the course was taught completely in an online/remote format. Among the topics explored in this course were sports and media, sport symbols, behaviors of sport constituents and deviance in sport, structured inequality in sport, and athlete development.

In doing this assessment, I used the following SLOs:

• Students will demonstrate the ability to locate, organize, and evaluate information from multiple sources.
  This SLO was evaluated using the issues in sport research paper. For this paper, students picked a current issue that exists within the world of sport. They were required to fully research this topic and articulate their opinion on the topic that was entirely based in fact. The paper was required to be grounded in existing literature to prove their point. The goal of the paper was to persuade the reader to understand and agree with their point of view.

For the indirect assessment of the SLOs, students were asked several questions related to perceptions about their ability to locate research articles on their chosen current event topic using research databases, to evaluate information from research articles on their topic, and to communicate information clearly and concisely in their paper. Survey items were rated on a scale from 1 – Strongly disagree, 2 – Disagree, 3 – Agree, and 4 – Strongly Agree. Students reporting a score of 3 or 4 were considered as meeting expectations concerning their perceived ability to complete the task.

Interpretation of the Results

As shown on the Student Assessment Results Summary Table, students did not meet expectations on the issues in sport research paper (only 72.7% of the class receiving a B- or higher). Students chose appropriate topics that corresponded with the week’s subject matter and found empirical articles from appropriate research databases to provide the class background information on the topic. All the students in this course were seniors or second semester juniors so they had prior experience using research databases.

The indirect assessment of the students’ perceived ability for several tasks was high. I believe this is due to thoroughly explaining the directions for the assignment multiple times via email to the students. Additionally, as stated earlier, the students at this point in their college career have had a variety of opportunities to search for appropriate sources.

Action Plan: Assessment-based Changes to the Course

Overall, I was disappointed that only 72.7% of the students received a B- or higher. Three of the six students who did not receive at least a B- were within two points of that mark. The three remaining students were far from the B- benchmark (two received a D and one earned an F). I think the easy way to reflect on this is to say the class was online, but I think there was more to it. Upon analysis of the students grades up until the research paper were very high. I believe that these students, who were graduating seniors, did the bare minimum to receive the final passing grade. Based on the learning outcomes used to assess this course, I will add an additional written component where students need to synthesize all the literature used to provide the background information for their paper. The breakdown will need to include the article cited in APA format, major findings, theory and methods used, and the results. This will be due much earlier in the semester so students cannot simply do the minimum.

Issues in Sport Research Paper Rubric

Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes for SM 3660 SM 4270 Sport in Contemporary U.S. Society: AY 2023-2024

Brief Explanation of Assessment Tools

Students enrolled in HMSL 6300 Administrative Processes of Intercollegiate Athletics are required work in groups of 4-5 and prepare a paper “hearing” related to an administrative task (hiring, firing, budget planning, staffing, facility renovation priority…) of their choice. First, students select a topic and research the current scenario at BGSU and other college athletic programs. Second, factors that impact the selected topic including any financial profit/loss, impact on general students, impact of staffing levels, and analysis of status including what other college athletics programs are doing must be identified and explained. Lastly, students must articulate a conclusion, including specifics as to what BGSU should change and keep the same given the facts presented. Students 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 (“I believe I can successfully critically evaluate topics in Sport Administration in my writing” 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 (100% and 94%; exceeded expectations) on the self-assessment and paper. Like other classes in Sport Administration, students had multiple in-class reviews of expectations (almost every session).

Action Plan: Assessment-based Changes to the Course

Two immediate assessment-based changes will occur. First, the paper was changed from an individual paper to a group project 3 weeks into the semester. Several reasons caused this change, including the fact that class time was used for several critical presentations from sitting college athletic directors. This caused less in class time to devote to working on the paper in class. Moving to group project, while valuable, likely led to each group having different levels of input in the paper from various students.

Second, while we discussed the process and requirements, we plan to have sections of the paper due each week (or every other week). This will allow for better determination of progress for each student.

An additional plan is to incorporate a more detailed survey (indirect measure). We often have very low response rate to student surveys. Thus, we went with a simple and quick one question. However, we believe more detail would be beneficial.

This assignment may or may not be the best for this course. We will spend some time reviewing other options for course papers.

Brief Explanation of Assessment Tools

Students enrolled in HMSL 6320 Budgeting and Planning for Sport and/or Leisure Enterprises are required to complete a paper related to course material on a topic of sport finance of their choice. First, students select a sport finance hypothetical scenario where the possibility of an organization, team of college could possibly gain or lose revenue. Second, factors that impact profit/loss must be identified and explained. Third, they must apply, after analysis what they believe will occur related to financial gain or loss based on their proposal. Lastly, students must articulate a conclusion, which indicates what they would do given the facts presented. Students 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 (“I understand the reasoning and analytical skills required to make decisions in the field of sport administration” 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 (90%; exceeded expectations) on the self-assessment yet met expectations (81%) on the sport finance paper. Students had multiple in-class reviews of expectations (almost every session). While we are pleased that both were not 100%, as that may indicate low standards or grading standards that rewarded low impact submissions, we did create action plans related to this assignment and SLO.

Action Plan: Assessment-based Changes to the Course

According to the data, some students need to improve their reasoning skills in terms of understanding the overall need to combine reasoning and analytical skills. Given the problem, the following changes will be implemented for upcoming school years to warrant better learning outcomes:

• More closely supervised discussion sessions. While the instructor had occasionally organized group sessions where students exchanged their idea, these meetings tended to be student-initiated without clearly predetermined learning goals by the instructor. The instructor would clarify specific goals for each group discussion session to help them master the concept in a more linear fashion. This is an area that has been identified previously and we will continue to increase and monitor the balance between student flexibility and accountability early in the process.
• Although measures met and exceeded expectations, Sport administration faculty plan to meet and discuss all SLO results to determine where we can increase competence in all of our SLO’s. In addition, we plan to review our benchmarks for this SLO to determine is shifts should be made. We are cautious to make drastic changes based on this review given the n=21. However, when compared to previous and future semesters, true strategies can be identified.

Brief Explanation of Assessment Tools

Students enrolled in HMSL 6370 – Sport in Higher Education were required to complete five book reviews that each examined different facets of collegiate sports. The students were to reflect and analyze the books they read. For instance, they had to address what are the main take away points, what did they agree/disagree with, what are practical implications for various stakeholder groups (coaches, administrators, athletes, etc.).

To assess the ability to persuade or argue a point, students had to complete a college sport issues research paper. Students had to write a literature review/persuasive paper describing what they believed was the biggest issue or most important issue that needed to be addressed in college sports now. They had to explain what the literature says about this topic and then argue their
point.

The indirect measure was a brief survey given to students asking them how they perceived their ability to write and analyze the information from their chosen books. This survey was given to
the graduate students to understand their familiarity with graduate research and writing. The students’ belief was that they performed at a level that was consistent with their scores. Each paper was worth 25 points, and while a student may not have earned the 20/25 necessary for the benchmark on the first paper, they were able to integrate comments and feedback that they were
provided and 20/21 of the students achieved at least 40/50 on the two papers combined.

Interpretation of the Results

As shown on the Student Assessment Results Summary Table, students exceeded expectations on the book review (100% of the class receiving a B- or higher). In all of the students five book review papers, the students received at least an 80%. The students did an appropriate job of providing a brief synopsis of the book, reviewing the books strengths and weaknesses, takeaways for various stakeholder groups within intercollegiate athletics, and whether they would recommend the book.

In the college sport issues paper, students were able to select a topic that they believed was the most important current issue in intercollegiate athletics. Students then had to articulate the purpose of their paper, write a thesis statement that laid out their point of view, and then provide their argument based on empirical research and data. Students also had to incorporate the opposing view and how they would counter those points. Overall, 17 of the 19 students in the class received at least an 80% on the assignment.

The indirect assessment of the students’ perceived ability for several tasks was high. I believe this is due to thoroughly explaining the directions for the assignment and giving the students to the freedom to choose the topics for the books that were either the most interesting to them
and/or relevant to their career aspiration. Additionally, as stated earlier, the students at this point in their college career have had a variety of opportunities to write papers in an academic setting.

Action Plan: Assessment-based Changes to the Course

Overall, I was very happy with how this assignment, and the overall course, went. The students were engaged in all aspects of the class and their performance reflected this. Nevertheless, I do believe that it is important to reflect upon what can be done to continue to improve the course. Based on the learning outcomes used to assess this course, I will add an additional written component where students need to submit earlier in the semester most of the literature used to provide the background information for their college sport issues paper. The breakdown will need to include the article cited in APA format, major findings, theory and methods used, and the results.

This profile offers information about the program in the context of its mission, basic purpose and key features.

Name of Institution: Bowling Green State University
Program/Specialized Accreditor(s): Comminssion on Sport Managment Accreditation (COSMA)
Institutional Accreditor: Higher Learning Commission (HLC)
Date of Next Comprehensive Program Accreditation Review: 2030
Date of Next Comprehensive Institutional Accreditation Review: 2030

URL where accreditation status is stated: https://www.bgsu.edu/education-and-human-development/applied-humandevelopment/sport-management/accreditation.html and https://www.bgsu.edu/academics/sport-management.html.

Indicators of Effectiveness with Undergraduates [As Determined by the Program]

1. Graduation Year: AY 2023-24    # of Graduates: 67    Graduation Rate: N/A
2. Average Time to Degree: 4-Year    Degree: 8-9 semesters    5-year Degree: N/A
3. Annual Transfer Activity (into Program):    Year: AY 2023-24    # of Transfers: 11 from within university to our major. Software does not allow for transfers outside of university    into BGSU and the program    Transfer Rate: Data not collected
4. Graduates Entering Graduate School:    Year: AY 2023-24    # of Graduates: _____     # Entering Graduate School: Data not collected
5. Job Placement (if appropriate):    Year: AY 2023-24    # of Graduates: _____    # Employed: Data not collected

Form developed by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation. © updated 2020