Running head: STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

Student-Athlete Development: Social Identity, Behavioral Outcomes and Academic Success

Casey B. Hendricks
Loyola University Chicago

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

Student athletes comprise a unique population on any one of the 1,200 college and
university campuses that are governed by the rules of the National Collegiate Athletic
Association (NCAA) through their participation in intercollegiate athletics. All students who
participate in club or intramural sports while in college may rightfully identify as both students
and athletes. But the student-athlete label has been coined to identify a more distinct group, the
focus of this review, which includes any individual enrolled as a full-time student and who plays
one of the 23 NCAA-sanctioned sports. The athletes must navigate the already challenging trials
of young adulthood while also managing the additional demands of participating in highly
organized, and highly competitive, sports programs. Many of these programs require a
dedication and time commitment that is unknown to most college studentsearly morning
practices, team meetings, in-season and off-season physical conditioning and usually some
variable degree of travel for games, tournaments, and sometimes post-season play. These
student-athletes have been a focus for developmental researchers for decades because of the
added demands that student-athletes voluntarily take on as compared to the average college
student. And studying how those added demands affect student development processes and
outcomes requires a unique theoretical and research approach that is focused squarely on the
particular challenges facing todays student athletes inside the lecture halls, gymnasiums and
dorm rooms on todays university campuses.
An integrative theory approach is useful when studying and reporting on the complex
nature of a student-athletes individual development. Multiple factors may influence this unique
form of development, including such things as how stereotype threat affects student athletes
identity salience, behaviors and even their academic performance. Perceptions of experiences in
relation to an institutions environment are also influential in student-athletes development.

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

This paper will discuss how research has revealed that such an integrative approach can help us
understand how student-athletes identity development, behavioral outcomes and academic
achievements are influenced by their interactions in the many different contexts, both inside and
outside the classroom, within their unique and often hyper-challenging environment.
Environmental Influences on Student-Athlete Identity Development
Student-athletes identity development can be understood through the application of
Bronfenbrenners Developmental Ecology Theory by explaining the interactions that occur
between the athlete and the environment in various contexts (Renn & Arnold, 2003). Studentathletes display various developmental outcomes through interactions with teammates, coaches,
peers and faculty in various academic, athletic and social environments. These interactions
themselves occur within various microsystems, which provide the context in which student
athletes experience patterns of activities, roles and interpersonal relations (Renn & Arnold,
2003). Developmental processes occur through these interactions between an individuals
various academic or athletic microsystemstheir peers in history class and their sorority sisters,
for example. Within these microsystems fellow athletes and coaching staff may interact in ways
that promote development for some or create dissonance for others. Importantly, a studentathletes academic identity and athletic identity can often place conflicting roles and demands on
the individual (Woodruff & Schallert, 2007). For example, academic identity may require a
student to place particular focus on studying and preparing for a final exam while the same
students athletic identity may create a conflicting sense of needing to put in more hours at the
gym to prepare for an upcoming athletic contest.
Generalized beliefs based on the characteristics of a particular group of people can lead to
stereotype threat (citation since it appears youre defining stereotype threat here). While

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

stereotype threat has implications for all student athletes, the consequences for female and Black
student athletes are particularly noteworthy because of the history of pre-existing marginalization
and long-held stereotypes, some of which remain particularly pervasive (Lance, 2004; Yopyk &
Prentice, 2005). For example, evidence suggests that Black male athletes solidify their athletic
identity prior to attending college. This research suggests that members of the Black community
can over-encourage young boys to emulate the professional Black athletes who are celebrated in
the media. As a result, such athletes may grow up believing that the only way to be successful in
life is to achieve elite athletic status (Tyler, 2014). By the time Black student athletes enroll in
college their athletic and racial identities will not only influence their developmental
experiences, they will almost certainly affect the perceptions others have of them as students.
Female student athletes can be subject to negative attitudes when they deviate from
traditional social norms (Harrison & Lynch, 2005). Gender roles, attitudes and behaviors are
culturally prescribed to each sex and become an active expression of gender identity (Lance,
2004). Masculine traits include competitiveness, independence and assertiveness in contrast to
stereotypical female attributes. For example, femininity is often stereotypically associated with
emotional, passive and dependent behaviors. But sports participation has traditionally been
associated with an assertive and affirmative masculinity. Women who play intercollegiate sports
can therefore be in danger of being perceived as having traditionally masculine characteristics
(Harrison & Lynch, 2005). To the contrary, however, researchers have found that participating
in gender nontraditional sports does not actually diminish the perceived femininity of females or
the masculinity of males (Harrison & Lynch, 2005). For example, in one study examining the
perceived gender roles in sports that were traditionally limited to one gender or the other, the
study participants were increasingly accepting of female participation in a traditionally male-

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

gendered sport (Harrison & Lynch, 2005). Based on these findings, which may surprise some, it
is possible to see a future that looks bright in terms of how fellow students will perceive student
athletes who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or queer.
Student-athlete identity development has been widely reported on and researched but
some identities appear to remain neglected. Although individuals with agent identities, generally
majority identities, do not have to endure the struggles many minority student athletes encounter,
the white male and female demographic accounts for nearly half of the entire student-athlete
population and deserves attention (National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2015). It is likely
that all student athletes experience the stigma associated with their athletic identity in
conjunction with other salient identities, but not all student-athlete experiences receive the same
attention from developmental researchers. In the literature reviewed for this paper, Black racial
identities were the only minority race that was examined in great detail. Hispanic and Asian
ethnicities are nearly absent in this developmental literature. An explanation for this may be a
simple lack of data since Hispanic/Latino student athletes represent only 2 percent of the entire
NCAA student-athlete population (National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2015).
A Team Environment Affects Behavioral Development
Behavioral development and decision-making are influenced by how student athletes
identities interact within these environments, especially within the athletic microsystem. The
relationships among the team athletes are unique in that there are very few non-athlete college
students who can relate to the experiences they share. The relationships among teammates can
be both beneficial and harmful to a student-athletes development (Tomon & Ting, 2010). A
student athletes multiple social identities will influence how they perceive the interactions with
teammates and the meaning they put on their relationships. Team climate can be enhanced or

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

weakened depending on the social development of its members, collectively and individually
(Tomon & Ting, 2010). .
Kimball (2007) found student-athlete identity is solidified throughout the college career
and is shaped by the entirety of experiences. An athlete experiences various interactions with
teammates on the field or court, with opponents, with trainers and coaches within different
contexts. A supportive environment plays a central role in student-athletes development of
autonomy. At the same time, the athletic team environment remains restrictive in some ways
and prohibits total autonomy achievement (Kimball, 2007). If the restrictions were lifted,
affording athletes the potential to achieve full autonomy, it is plausible that the team success may
not ever reach their ultimate goal. Student athletes reframe their experiences within the
limitations of their environment and internalize a commitment to the team and lifestyle they
chose (Kimball, 2007). Student development theory suggests that student athletes must
internalize their choice to remain in a restrictive lifestyle because without the ability to cope
athletes would likely disengage from sports participation (Kimball, 2007). Without the
regimented structure of the immediate environment, would the commitments or relationships
remain unchanged? It is not likely that the relationships would develop as strongly in a lessstringent environment. The arguably restrictive team environment promotes the development of
those relationships and motivates student athletes commitment.
Relationships are a main factor in student athletes decision-making as well. Decisions
are made based on goals and what behavior is expected in order to achieve the goal (Kimball,
2007). Based on this assumption athletes would make sound judgments every time they are
confronted with a decision. If an athlete has developed a sense care and respect they are more
likely to contribute to the success of their teams efforts. Student-athletes who have achieved

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

this level of maturity make decisions in consideration of their teammates (Kimball, 2007).
Athletes recognize a decision they make could help or hinder the team. One athlete explained,
The biggest thing for me is not letting [the team] down (Kimball, 2007, p. 826). On the
contrary, researchers have determined student-athletes also make decisions that could harm the
teams success (Tomon & Ting, 2010).
The decision to partake in drug or alcohol use is also influenced by teammates. Decisionmaking and behavioral outcomes of student-athletes in their environment are of particular
interest amongst researchers. Athletic culture can be defined as the unique environment in which
college students who are also athletes live and move when they are fulfilling their roles and
responsibilities (Despres, Brady, & McGowan, 2008). Traditionally participation in
intercollegiate sports has been promoted as enhancing student development but critics claim the
student-athlete is often conflicted between the student role and athlete role (Despres, Brady, &
McGowan, 2008).
The campus environment and the context of student-athletes interactions and team
climate can produce different behavioral outcomes. Drinking habits among the student-athlete
population is of particular interest because of the influential effect of team cohesion. Students
overestimate how often their peers engage in risky behaviors, such as drinking or drug use, and
develop a false perception of the social norms related to that behavior (Tomon & Ting, 2010).
The student-athletes from Division I sports reported less frequent drinking and drug use than
their peers representing nonrevenue sports (Tomon & Ting, 2010). The pressure to win and the
NCAA regulations are expected to me more strictly enforced for the revenue-producing teams;
the more time individuals spend together the more likely they are to take pride in working
together as a team (Kimball, 2007).

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

Depending on the sport a student-athlete plays social interactions outside of the athletic
environment will differ and depend greatly on the timing of the off-season therefore shaping
development in various ways (Renn & Arnold, 2003). Student-athletes drug use significantly
increases during the off-season (Yusko, Buckman, White, & Pandina, 2008). This may be
because the athlete is hyperaware of the detriment drug use can have on their athletic
performance due to potential for immediate consequences.
More research is needed to understand motivations and reasons for drug use and the type
of drugs that are used. The factors that contribute to increased drinking and drug experimenting
that occurs during off-seasons are also unknown.
Academic Outcomes in Student-Athlete Development
The commercialism of college sports has sometimes brought negative attention to the
NCAA. The NCAA maintains that its mission is rooted in enhancing the student experience
through the integration of sports and academics with the highest level of integrity (National
Collegiate Athletic Association, 2015). There is evidence contradicting the NCAAs mission in
supporting the student. The student-athletes development within the athletic and academic
environments often conflict, despite the NCAAs stated mission.
Interactions between the student-athlete and faculty can enhance or impede positive
academic outcomes depending, at least in many cases, on the students demographics (Comeaux,
2011). Black student athletes report feeling pressured to prove that they are equally as
competent in academic abilities as their non-athletic peers (Stone, Harrison & Mottley). The
validity of their feelings is affirmed as proven in Comeauxs (2011) study of faculty attitudes
towards Division I student athletes. Black faculty view student athletes in a more positive light
than their non-Black colleagues. Negative stereotypes about Black student athletes academic

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

abilities can undermine the efforts in the classroom and may even have harmful effects on a
students socialization (Comeaux, 2011).
Faculty-student interactions appear to affect female and male student athletes differently.
According to a study of 169 student athletes, females reported higher satisfaction with faculty
flexibility in dealing with accommodations for athletic obligations (Lance, 2004). Overall there
was conflicting information regarding role conflict for student athletes. These contradictions
may be explained because multiple sports were represented by the participants and as a general
population, student athletes do not experience problems. This may be true when surveying all
student athletes but the uniqueness of Division I basketball and football players situation proves
that these problems are isolated to revenue-generating sports. In addition to understanding the
academic outcomes among student-athletes, it is important to analyze how cognitive
development and environmental influences affect academic success.
Similarly, studies have revealed negative attitudes towards student athletes in regards to
academic competence (Engstrom & Sedlacek, 1991). A similar conclusion can be assumed by
team coaches and staff. If the coach has a positive racial stereotype of the Black players on the
team, the coach may have a tendency to push the student athletes towards the athletic domain at
the expense of their education (Czopp, 2010).
Black student athletes are sometimes socialized to believe that their only path to success
is by way of sports. Exposure to the glorified images of professional athletes is not exclusive to
Black student-athletes; all athletes are more than likely exposed to the same images on a daily
basis. The difference is revealed by the meaning an individual constructs when confronted with
those images. Perrys theory of intellectual and ethical development highlights the intellectual
development that shapes how people view experiences (Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton, & Renn,

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

10

2010). Perrys theory can also be applied to a student athletes intellectual development with
additional factors occurring simultaneously. Faculty-student engagements that occur within an
experiential learning activity or one-on-one collaboration are vital to a students learning
development and acquisition of practical knowledge and skills (Comeaux, 2011). The frequency
and quality of faculty-student engagements impact the depth of development. Some faculty hold
prejudiced attitudes about student athletes academic abilities and may diminish the quality of
engaging activities (Comeaux, 2011).
Faculty attitudes negatively affect student athletes not unlike stereotype threat impacts
performance. A study of stereotype threat revealed how priming Black athletes, who typically
excelled in academics, with their student-athlete identity weakened test-taking performance and
reduced the student efforts (Stone, Harrison, & Mottley, 2012). College athletes, most
particularly those who play the revenue-generating sports, are often perceived as dumb jocks
who take entry-level classes to maintain eligibility to play their sport (Stone, Harrison, &
Mottley, 2012). School administrators, faculty and student affairs professionals can combat
these misconceptions and prevent negative developmental outcomes through education.
Redefining the student-athlete identity as associated with intelligence, motivation and integrity
can help reduce the negative perceptions of the targeted group (Stone, Harrison, & Mottley,
2012).
Several dynamics affect a student athletes learning and academic success. The
environment where peer interaction occurs may be influenced by preconceived notions about
Black student athletes. A study revealed how positive stereotypes led to negative outcomes. In
the study, White participants assumed the role of a career counselor and offered guidance to a
Black or White student athlete who excelled in athletics. The participants advised significantly

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

11

more Black students to pursue athletics while advising White students, with the similar athletic
profiles, to focus on academics (Czopp, 2010). Czopps study (2010) highlighted the stereotypes
of African Americans and the consequences of those beliefs. If similar attitudes exist among all
of their peers, Black student athletes may often be in unsupportive and unhealthy environments.
Academic motivation is an additional developmental factor that varies within the
environmental context. Student athletes attempt to understand, reconcile and live within
possibly conflicting contexts (i.e., academics and athletics) (Woodruff & Schallert, 2008). The
performance expected by the athlete and the effort required to succeed as a student can cause
conflict for individuals. Student athletes may favor the identity that is most adaptive in the social
contexts experienced (Woodruff & Schallert, 2008). Depending on which identity is favored
there is potential for disidentification with the other identity.
Identity is closely linked to motivation when examining the motivations for student
athletes in academic settings (Woodruff & Schallert, 2008). Academic success is influenced by a
student athletes post-graduation goals. Students who are confident in their athletic ability and
aspired to play sports professionally may lack motivation to excel in the academic role
(Woodruff & Schallert, 2008). If this is the case, educators need to develop interventions to
motivate student athletes to seek academic success. More than half of college football players
aspire to play professionally but less than 2 percent of those student athletes actually achieve that
goal (National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2015). Career counselors and academic advisors
can reach out to the athletic community to help prepare student athletes for their roles postgraduation. Preparing the student athletes can prevent emotional crisis, anxiety and depression
for the individuals who hold false hope for playing professional sports and neglect to prepare
themselves for life without an athletic identity (Despres, Brady, & McGowan, 2008).

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

12

Conclusion
The student athlete has a unique experience. They must navigate the trials of young
adulthood while also managing additional demands requiring time and commitments that fellow
non-athlete students do not have. They must live and act within often confusing rules established
by the NCAA, a multimillion-dollar non-profit organization whose commercialization sometimes
contributes to the difficult role conflicts that student athletes experience as both students and
athletes.
The development of self-authorship is crucial for the healthy development of college
students. To support student athletes development of autonomy coaches and athletic
administrators should engage with the students. Meaningful, mature discussions will allow the
student athletes to better understand rules and administrative policies.
There is extensive literature available to interpret student-athletes development;
however, the majority focuses on identity, gender roles, stereotype threat and frequency of
alcohol use. There are significant gaps in the research that should be addressed. Most studies
focus on student athletes most at risk for developmental difficulties, females and Black athletes.
I would like to see some broader reporting on the development of all athletes. Stereotypes and
negative attitudes remain widely associated with student athletes. This means that more attention
must be directed toward educating others on the demands and commitments student athletes are
subjected to.
Student-athletes identity development, cognitive and behavioral outcomes and academic
achievements are all dimensions that researchers have analyzed within various environmental
contexts. The relationships among teammates and how that particular athletic environment

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

13

shapes behavioral development is perhaps one of the most interesting areas of study. These
athletic relationships, including with coaches and administrators, are a main factor influencing
the development of student athletes decision-making. In many cases, the student athlete can
learn that decisions are made based on goals and that certain behavior is expected in order to
achieve those goals. These cognitive and behavioral influences can promote academic
achievement and related social outcomes. Successes by a diverse set of student athletes can help
redefine the student-athlete identity as one that should be associated with intelligence, motivation
and integrity. They can reduce lingering negative perceptions of this sometimes targeted group.

Casey,
Pretty good job on this assignment; it is clear you dove deep into the literature and have
made some strong assertions and conclusions about it as related to student development. There
were a couple of places where you could have made the connections to specific student
development theories more explicitly (I marked it a couple of times so you can see what I mean),
particularly when the cited authors dont make those connections cleanly. Your structure and
flow and APA made sense and were well organized. I would refrain from using whatever you
might have used to construct the references page and in-text citations, as it does not allow for
editing, which creates a problem in several places.
26/30

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

14

References
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2015, April 26). Governance. Retrieved from
ncaa.org: http://www.ncaa.org/governance
Aries, E., McCarthy, D., Salovey, P., & Banaji, M. R. (2004). A comparison of athletes and nonathletes at highly selective colleges: Academic performance and personal development.
Research in Higher Education, 45(6), 577-602.
Beals, K. A., Brey, R. A., & Gonyou, J. B. (1999). Understanding the female athlete triad: Eating
disorders, amenorrhea, and osteoporosis. Journal of School Health, 69(8), 337-340.
Comeaux, E. (2011). A study of attitudes toward college student-athletes: Implications for
faculty-athletics engagement. The Journal of Negro Education, 80(4), 521-532.
Czopp, A. M. (2010, May). Studying is lame when he got game: racial stereotypes and the
discouragement of Black student-athletes. Social Psychology of Education, 485-498.
doi:DOI 10.1007/s11218-010-9129-8

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

15

Despres, J., Brady, F., & McGowan, A. S. (2008). Understanding the culture of the studentathlete: Implications for college counselors. Journal of Humanistic Counseling,
Education and Development, 47(2), 200-211.
Engstrom, C. M., & Sedlacek, W. E. (1991, September/October). A study of prejudice toward
univeristy student-athletes. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70, 189-193.
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Later cognitive
structural theories. In Student development in college (2 ed., pp. 119-135). San Francisco:
John Wiley & Sons.
Gaston Gayles, J., & Hu, S. (2009). The influence of student engagement and sport participation
on college outcomes among Division I student athletes. The Journal of Higher Education,
80(3), 315-333.
Grossbard, J. R., Geisner, I. M., Mastroleo, N. R., Kilmer, J. R., Turrisi, R., & Larimer, M. E.
(2009). Athletic identity, descriptive norms, and drinking among athletes transitioning to
college. Addictive Behaviors, 34, 352-359. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2008.11.011
Harrison, K. C., Stone, J., Shapiro, J., Yee, S., Boyd, J. A., & Rullan, V. (2009). The role of
gender identities and stereotype salience with the academic performace of male and
female college athletes. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 33(1), 78-96.
doi:10.1177/0193723508328902
Harrison, L. A., & Lynch, A. B. (2005). Social role theory and the perceived gender role
orientation of athletes. Sex Roles, 52(3/4), 227-236. doi:10.1007/s11199-005-1297-1
Kimball, A. C. (2007). "You signed the line": Collegiate student-athletes' perceptions of
autonomy. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8, 818-835.
doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2007.03.005

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

16

Lance, L. M. (2004). Gender differences in perceived role conflict among university studentathletes. College Student Journal, 38(2), 179-190.
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2015, April 26). NCAA champion debunked. Retrieved
from ncaa.org:
http://ncaachampionmagazine.org/features/debunked/#sthash.rqCp6Xel.dpbs
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2015, April 25). NCAA core values. Retrieved from
ncaa.org: http://www.ncaa.org/about/ncaa-core-purpose-and-values
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2015, April 26). Race and gender demographics
search. Retrieved from ncaa.org:
http://web1.ncaa.org/rgdSearch/exec/displayResultsPercents
Renn, K. A., & Arnold, K. D. (2003). Reconceptualizing research on college student peer
Culture. The Journal of Higher Education, 74(3), 261-291.
Stone, J., Harrison, C. K., & Mottley, J. V. (2012). "Dont call me a student-athlete": The effect
of identity priming on stereotype threat for academically engaged african american
college athletes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 34, 99-106.
doi:10.1080/01973533.2012.655624
Tomon, J. E., & Ting, S. R. (2010, March/April). Effects of team climate on substance use
behaviors, perceptions, and attitudes of student-athletes at a large, public university.
Journal of College Student Development, 51(2), 162-179. doi:DOI: 10.1353/csd.0.0126
Tyler, K. M. (2014). African American Athletic Identity. In Identity and African American men:
Exploring the content of our characterization (pp. 181-197). Lanham, Maryland:
Lexington Books. Retrieved April 18, 2014, from
https://books.google.com/books?isbn=0739183966

STUDENT-ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT

17

Woodruff, A. L., & Schallert, D. L. (2008). Studying to play, playing to study: Nine college
student-athletes' motivational sense of self. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33,
34-57. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.04.001
Yopyk, D. J., & Prentice, D. A. (2005). Am I an athlete or a student? Identity salience and
stereotype threat in student-athletes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 27(4), 329336.
Yusko, D. A., Buckman, J. F., White, H. R., & Pandina, R. J. (2008). Alcohol, tobacco, illicit
drugs, and performance enhancers: A comparison of use by college student athletes and
nonathletes. Journal of American College Health, 57(3), 281-289.