the moral reasoning of student athletes and athletic training students

More documents

Recommendations

Info

esponsibility (Cohen, 1998) the many cheating scandals, including the first intercollegiate crew race in 1852, raise concerns as to whether the way sport is taught, coached, and practiced is consistent with the ideal mission and goals of both higher education and the NCAA. However, measuring the development of one’s character in terms of integrity, sportsmanship, and democratic ideals is difficult, however one way in which researchers have measured the relationship between the ideal of sport competition in terms of moral character and individual’s beliefs towards this ideal is through moral reasoning (Lumpkin, Stoll, & Beller, 2003). Moral reasoning is a cognitive process whereby individuals learn to think, reason, and reflect relative to a set of moral principles. It is “[t]he ability to systematically think through a moral problem, taking into consideration one’s own values and beliefs while weighing them against what others value and believe” (Lumpkin, Beller, & Stoll, 2003, p. 6). Moral reasoning is not synonymous with moral character but is a necessary component of moral character. Lickona (1991) argues that good character is comprised of moral knowing, moral feeling, and moral doing. To act morally requires that an individual know and then value moral principles. However, just because one knows and values, does not mean right action as there are many competing factors influencing behavior. But at its very least, moral reasoning is a requisite. Thus, it is the intention of this study to examine to what extent intercollegiate sport and higher education fulfill their stated missions of developing character by examining two specific student populations: student athletes and athletic training students relative to their moral reasoning, recognizing that moral reasoning is a necessary component of moral character.. The Moral Reasoning of Athletes Most athletic departments personnel would argue that they work hard to ensure that student athletes are supported in their educational experiences so that the student can achieve the 6
purpose of higher education, which seems to be an intellectual growth and development of students into positive contributing members of society. While the purpose of higher education may be best discussed in another paper, it is important to recognize that higher education claims to fulfill a higher purpose. Whether or not this is the case for collegiate student athletes may be unclear. Much research exists with moral reasoning using the Hahm-Beller Values Choice Inventory (Hahm, Beller, & Stoll, 1989). It is a general inventory that addresses commonly occurring, questionably ethical practices in sport. Other such inventories exist that examine moral reasoning in sport from a general perspective, but few, if any, instruments have been developed to examine moral reasoning specific to doping in sport. The original 21 question Hahm-Beller Values Choice Inventory (Hahm, Beller, & Stoll, 1989), is a valid and reliable tool for measuring moral reasoning in sport in general (Cronbach Alphas range .77- .88), however the revised version (Beller, Stoll, & Hahm, 2006) has 12 Likert-based questions and Cronbach alphas of .81-.88). Currently, an instrument is being developed and validated with a specific purpose of measuring the moral reasoning of doping in sport (Stoll, Gwebu, & Beller, 2006). This instrument, the Ergogenic Aids & Moral Competence Inventory has five main questions based in deontological theory and uses moral reasoning theory (see Chapter three). Because the Hahm- Beller Values Choice Inventory is a valid and reliable measure of moral reasoning it will be used as one of the methods to establish construct validity of the Ergogenic Aids Moral Competence Inventory. 7
Page 1 and 2: THE MORAL REASONING OF STUDENT ATHL
Page 3 and 4: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Competitive, Respon
Page 5 and 6: sport. The results of this study we
Page 7 and 8: APPENDIX A ________________________
Page 9 and 10: CHAPTER ONE Introduction What is it
Page 11 and 12: college edifice, their paternalisti
Page 13: are stronger adults because of the
Page 17 and 18: dope or not dope as well as how ins
Page 19 and 20: the athletic training facilities. T
Page 21 and 22: Certified athletic trainers and ath
Page 23 and 24: 5. What are the differences between
Page 25 and 26: 4. Designer Drugs - A drug produced
Page 27 and 28: CHAPTER TWO Literature Review The p
Page 29 and 30: more of a look like German institut
Page 31 and 32: institutions, conferences, and nati
Page 33 and 34: the cultural norms as a measure of
Page 35 and 36: “Moral reasoning, a systematic, l
Page 37 and 38: describe the reasons for particular
Page 39 and 40: it must be noted that only a low po
Page 41 and 42: Taylor-Hanson, in review). However,
Page 43 and 44: issues in sport or specific issues
Page 45 and 46: naturally occurring male sex hormon
Page 47 and 48: stored. After a few weeks, normal l
Page 49 and 50: of what the supplement actually con
Page 51 and 52: Despite the research and the warnin
Page 53 and 54: use their judgment in discriminatin
Page 55 and 56: CHAPTER THREE Methodology Research
Page 57 and 58: Ergogenic Aids and Moral Competence
Page 59 and 60: and then evaluated each of the thre
Page 61 and 62: Procedures Arrangements were made w
Page 63 and 64: CHAPTER FOUR Results The purpose of
Page 65 and 66:
Table 2. Means and standard deviati
Page 67 and 68:
I do not care whether Arnold choose
Page 69 and 70:
Danny should do whatever will make
Page 71 and 72:
Team Indiv. ATS F % F % F % Most co
Page 73 and 74:
Most common reason not to take the
Page 75 and 76:
Hypothesis Six No difference exists
Page 77 and 78:
and find that low levels of moral r
Page 79 and 80:
athletic training students did not
Page 81 and 82:
another paper, the notions of care-
Page 83 and 84:
esearch scored relatively low when
Page 85 and 86:
Scenario five presented a similar s
Page 87 and 88:
conversation and attitude speaks to
Page 89 and 90:
consistent set of moral principles,
Page 91 and 92:
REFERENCES Alder, P., & Alder, P.A.
Page 93 and 94:
Beller, J.M., Stoll, S.K., Williams
Page 95 and 96:
Colby, A., Kohlberg, L., Gibbs, J.,
Page 97 and 98:
Honour, J.W. (2004). The fight for
Page 99 and 100:
Perry, P.J., Lund, B.C., Deninger,
Page 101 and 102:
Smith, R.A. (1988). Sports and Free
Page 103 and 104:
APPENDIX A HAHM - BELLER VALUES CHO
Page 105 and 106:
APPENDIX B EAMCI Instrument Please
Page 107 and 108:
2. George, while hanging out at the
Page 109 and 110:
4. Tony is the kind of athletic tra
Page 111 and 112:
APPENDIX C IRB approval 103
show all

the moral reasoning of student athletes and athletic training students

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?