CHAPTER
28
BEST PRACTICES in CAREER TRANSITION PROGRAMMING for
COLLEGE ATHLETES
Kristina M. Navarro
KEY TERMS
higher education
intercollegiate
athletics
career
development
college athlete
experience
career
transitions
Today, higher education student affairs professionals are charged to understand the challenges and needs of a diverse
student body. These professionals must also prepare a diverse group of students for the inevitable transition to career
fields in life after their higher education experience. In turn, college career development programs now exist to assist
students not only to develop their academic talents and transferrable skill sets during college, but also to prepare
them for life after this transition (National Career Development Association, 2013). Today the National Career
Development Association (NCDA) offers specific training to prepare higher education professionals as certified
Career Development Facilitators. Current student affairs professionals who possess this certification demonstrate
mastery in 12 core competencies to assisting individuals with transition from school to work or between career
fields (NCDA, 2013).
Higher education professionals must seek to further understand the challenges that certain student populations
experience during college to best prepare them for lifelong success as professionals in a volatile economy and
competitive job market. Savickas et al. (2009) suggest competition in the contemporary job markets is exacerbated
by the globalization of economies and rapid advances in information technology. In turn, it is of enhanced importance
to understand how athletes navigate processes of career development throughout their higher education experience
and how student affairs professionals can best prepare these individuals for impending challenges as they transition
to the work force.
CAMPUS ENGAGEMENT AND CAREER DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES
Reason, Terenzini, and Domingo (2006) posit the college years are vitally important to processes of career
development. The authors suggest students experience significant periods of cognitive and social development as
they engage with the college environment. Consistently, research suggests that many students face multidimensional
adjustment processes as they cognitively adjust to the rigor of college work, emotionally discover a new sense of
identity, and psychosocially establish peer groups (Keup, 2007; Kidwell, 2005; Reason et al., 2006). Furthermore,
Gaston-Gayles and Hu (2009) suggest athletes, a population nested within the general higher education student body,
face unique challenges that influence their holistic development potential during college. In turn, Gaston-Gayles and
Hu (2009) posit the level to which undergraduate students engage in educationally sound activities influences career
readiness (i.e., identification with roles outside of sports and ability to transfer skill sets in college to the work
force). Regardless of student group affiliation, higher education literature suggests universities need to support
students via holistic campus-wide career development programming to lay the groundwork for long-term career
success (Baille & Danish, 1992; Keup, 2007; Kidwell, 2005).
Considering students face multifaceted challenges during their higher education experience, scholars continue to
the note the importance of student engagement to future career preparation. Jordan and Denison (1990) suggest
engagement outside of the confines of the classroom can best prepare students for life after college in career fields as
they are able to encounter and explore diverse career alternatives via experiential learning. Donahue (2004) and
Reason et al. (2006) further support this notion and add that experiential exercises outside the classroom (i.e.,
practicum and experiential learning assignments) can help students to develop a sense of community and enhance
consideration of diverse career alternatives. Such experiential learning activities enable students to develop
interpersonal connections and network with potential employers early in their higher education experience. Overall,
engagement outside of the classroom is viewed as beneficial to career exploration as students explore viable career
alternatives outside of typical environments.
CAREER DEVELOPMENT AS AN EVOLUTIONARY PRO-CESS
Contemporary college career development practitioners continue to reflect Baldwin and Blackburn’s (1981)
foundational position that career development programming must be viewed as a process rather than an isolated
program or experience. This framework is acknowledged today as a best practice in the field of higher education and
career development (NCDA, 2013). While career development theorists differ in specific approaches to career
development, findings generally support the notion that career development is a dynamic, psychosocial process
rather than a static phase of life (Baldwin & Black, 1981; Hall & Nougaim, 1968; Osborn, Howard, & Leierer, 2007;
Savickas, 2002, 2005). Since career development is a very individualized construct, career development programs
and interventions are complex (Baldwin & Blackburn, 1981). Overall career development literature suggests career
programming must consider the needs and interests of a diverse student population in order to be effective (Baldwin
& Blackburn, 1981; Hall & Nougaim, 1968; Osborn et al., 2007). In turn, the National Career Development
Association continues to consider this foundational literature and philosophy of career development being an
evolutionary process as it presents guiding competencies and benchmarks for contemporary career programming
(NCDA, 2013).
Contemporary Literature on Career Development Programs
Today scholars continue to grapple with how to best implement career programs across the higher education
experience. In turn, best practices in career program delivery continue to be a highly debated issue in the current
literature. Reese and Miller (2006) suggest that highly structured career development programs best reach diverse
undergraduate populations. To assess the effects of specific programming designed to promote career decisionmaking efficacy, Reese and Miller (2006) studied a group of 30 undergraduate students enrolled in an introductory
career development course. The results demonstrated that athletes who took the course perceived they had a higher
level of career decisiveness, specifically with respect to setting career goals and creating a career trajectory plan.
Similarly, Davis and Horne (1986) and Garis and Niles (1990) suggest that career courses enhance the educational
experience and the transition from higher education to careers. Garis and Niles (1990) demonstrate students’ desire
for career development programming that is highly structured and intentional. Davis and Horne (1986) similarly
demonstrate in a study on undergraduate students at four-year institutions that highly structured programming best
prepares students for impending transitions to career fields. Clearly, undergraduate athletes reveal throughout these
studies that intentional and structured career development programs are beneficial to their transition to life after
college.
STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVE
Best Practices in Career Transitions
Kelli Richards is a career development coordinator and academic advisor for Division I athletes at the University of
Wisconsin, Madison. A former Division I college volleyball player at Northwestern University, she earned an
undergraduate degree in human development and psychological services and a master’s of education degree in
counseling psychology from Wisconsin. She currently works with the Peer Mentorship and Freshmen Experience
components of a formalized four-year athlete career development curriculum nested within the Badger Life Skills
Academy.
Reflecting on her experiences with athletes, Kelli discusses the importance of college student affairs
professionals taking a holistic approach to the development of athletes as they transition from high school to college
and college to career fields. She notes athletes often come to campus unaware of the many career resources available
to them. Kelli views her primary role as a career development coordinator in athletics as assisting athletes with
processes of career exploration, choice, and preparation for a lifetime of success after sport. She highlights the
Badger Life Skills Academy as a crucial program to foster personal development and career decision-making skills
over the course of the college experience. As well, she notes that maintaining athletic eligibility is a reality
professionals in her field must be cognizant of as they advise athletes, but this approach cannot be the sole focus of
decision-making processes. Kelli feels her foundational training as a student affairs and certified Career
Development Facilitator enables her to assist students to develop a holistic action plan for success during college as
well as in their aspiring career fields.
Building on this growing trend to develop intentional career programming, a study conducted by the National
Association of College and Employers in 1998 concludes more than half of the four-year institutions surveyed
support formal career development courses (Collins, 1998). According to Collin’s research, this number continues to
increase as faculty and administrators provide career development program opportunities in the form of courses for
credit. As students demonstrate a need and desire for intentional career development programming, higher education
student affairs practitioners must continue to develop and sustain such programming.
Career Theory
When focusing on how to design career development programming, the theoretical contributions of John Holland
often guide higher education programmatic decisions. Holland (1997) draws a clear connection between one’s
personality and environment. His theoretical framework continues to be regarded as one of the most influential in the
field of career counseling. Holland’s theory is manifested in a career assessment tool that enables students to
understand individual interests and obtain career clarity through categorization of strengths and weaknesses, as well
as likes and dislikes. Gottfredson (1981) notes that while Holland’s assessment tool is commonly used in
organizational behavior disciplines, this framework and assessment tool is also beneficial to students during their
higher educational experience. He further posits this tool enables students to reflect on strengths and weaknesses and
to understand how their skill set fits certain majors and career fields. Many student affairs practitioners draw on this
tool as they create and implement career development programming for students. However, this tool is not tailored to
specific needs of diverse populations, namely, athletes. In addition, this tool is considered outdated according to
Savickas’s (2002) Career Construction Theory, in which students should not be classified into categories; rather, they
should be seen as consistently growing and acquiring new tools in response to life experiences.
Additional research discussing career development as an evolutionary process notes the importance for students
to develop self-efficacy or confidence in career decision making during their college experience. Paulson and Betz
(2004) studied 627 undergraduate students measuring six variables of confidence. The findings revealed that low
levels of confidence in career decision making among students can be tied to low levels of confidence in academic
skills acquired during their educational process (Taylor & Betz, 1983). Paulson and Betz (2004) posit students who
develop poor self-esteem in the classroom due to academic defeat can continue to experience difficulty with respect
to career confidence in career decision-making processes (i.e., career decision exploration, choice, and
preparation). Therefore, it is of heightened importance to engage students in career development skill set acquisition
from the foundational first year and throughout their college years. Student engagement is not only related to
academic-related endeavors but also career-related activities to enhance self-esteem; confidence is paramount to
facilitate the multistage career decision-making process.
Overall, college students are placed in an environment that lends itself to development and change. The higher
education experience is often referred to as a time of intense adaptation, life change, and a need to overcome
challenges (Keup, 2007; Kidwell, 2005; Reason et al., 2006). Moreover, as students navigate this new environment
and adapt to life experiences, they garner foundational transferrable skills for success in life after college. However,
intentional career programming is also needed to guide students. In turn, it is beneficial for student affairs
practitioners who work with diverse student groups to design career development programming while considering
the multifaceted development that takes place during the college experience and the evolutionary process of career
development (Baldwin & Blackburn, 1981; Hall & Nougaim, 1968; Osborn et al., 2007; Savickas, 2002).
CONTEMPORARY COLLEGE ATHLETES AND CAREER TRANSITIONS
For certain population subsets, namely, athletes, career transitions take on additional meaning. As athletes approach
this transition from higher education to career fields, they also face an inevitable end to the college athletic
experience. For many, nearing the end of one’s athletic career further complicates the impending transition to life
after sport. According to the NCAA’s most recent study on the estimated probability of athletes pursuing professional
sports, on average less than 3% of athletes who participate in college sports will eventually pursue professional
careers in their sport (NCAA, 2011). Regardless of participation in intercollegiate athletics, the transition from
college to the real world is viewed as both difficult and transformational for young adults (Harrison & Lawrence,
2004).
THE COLLEGE ATHLETE EXPERIENCE
For many students, college is a frightening and overwhelming experience, full of challenges and change. Kidwell
(2005) notes that all college students must study for college-level exams, live away from home, and create new
social networks. However, researchers who focus on the athlete population argue athletes’ experiences in college are
different from the experiences of nonathletes (Howard-Hamilton & Watt, 2001). Such challenges are posited to
separate athletes from general population students. These include: the internal need to balance roles as student and
athlete (Adler & Adler, 1987); a psychosocial affinity to identify with athletic roles (Adler & Adler, 1987); external
feelings of isolation from the student body and faculty (Broughton & Neyer, 2001); and external pressure to maintain
athletic eligibility in the big-business college sports environment at the expense of academic goals (Lapchick, 2006).
CASE STUDY
Toward an Understanding of College Athlete Career Construction Processes
Researchers highlight college athletes, a specific subset of individuals nested within the general student body, who
face additional challenges with respect to constructing meaningful career plans. As such, this qualitative case study
employed a multiple semistructure interview method to explore the life experiences of 29 senior athletes at a large
midwestern university. Framed from a constructivist epistemology, findings of this phenomenological study were
guided by Savickas’s (2005) Career Construction Theory. Personal narratives were collected via 29 semistructured
individual interviews and analyzed by employing pattern and process coding techniques to develop cognitive mind
maps for each participant. Collectively these cognitive mind maps illustrated how athletes construct individual
career paths and engage in career decision-making processes during their higher education experience.
The findings demonstrated that all of the participants in this case study viewed undergraduate academic major
choice as a fundamental component of career choice and preparation. For example, participants discussed the
importance of an academic major to provide transferrable skill sets to career fields in life after sport. In addition,
this case study confirmed previous findings in athlete development literature centering on themes of role conflict
(Adler & Adler, 1987) and athletic eligibility concerns (Case, Greer, & Brown, 1987; Fountain & Finley, 2009,
2011). First, participants stated they faced an internal psychosocial struggle to balance the dual roles of student and
athlete during their higher education experience. This role conflict was most prevalent with individuals who
participated in the revenue-generating sports of football, as well as men’s hockey and basketball. Second, 59% of
athlete participants discussed eligibility and time constraints during college limited their ability to fully engage in
career construction process. Participants also discussed their difficulty in choosing academic majors that not only
assisted with eligibility but also directly related to future career aspirations, and engaging in campus-wide career
preparation programs. Likewise, participants noted the time commitment of Division I athletics was a primary reason
to pursue less labor-and time-intensive majors and thus rely solely on athletic department career support.
Findings from this case study also confirm previous studies that suggest the time commitment of Division I
athletics influences athletes’ drive to pursue degree paths that often fail to align with future career aspirations (e.g.,
Case, Greer, & Brown, 1987; Fountain & Finley, 2009, 2011; Renick, 1974). Subsequently, these internal and
external struggles athletes’ face during college implicate how they construct career identities and prepare for life
after sport. Continued analyses of athlete career construction processes can guide contemporary student affairs
practitioners as they advise this special population of students.
Blann (1985), Kennedy, and Dimmick (1987), Murphy, Petitpas, and Brewer (1996), and Sowa and Gressard
(1983) argue athletes struggle to dedicate sufficient time and resources to further career and postgraduate plans
throughout their higher education experience. They posit the lack of time dedicated to career exploration can result in
a lower perceived level of career maturity upon graduation. This failure to explore opportunities outside of
comfortable skill sets can limit the career construction process with respect to potential career choices.
Overall, literature on the college athlete experience suggests additional support is necessary for athletes to
prepare for this life transition. Since athletes may rely to a greater extent on support services internal to athletic
departments, it is imperative for higher education professionals to understand the complexities of this special
population and develop intentional programs that best assist with this impending transition.
CONCLUSION
This chapter considers Division I athletes’ preparation for life after their undergraduate programs of study.
Discussion of the higher education literature presents clear themes and recommendations for practitioners. In this
section, I highlight specific recommendations for higher education practitioners who work closely with athletes.
Astin (1999), Gaston-Gayles and Hu (2009), and Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) suggest that one of the most
influential factors to the personal development of students during college is engaging in purposeful activities to
facilitate a holistic student experience. In this sense, intentionally engaging with career preparation activities during
the undergraduate experience is critically important. However, researchers must continue to probe just how athletes,
who face these additional internal and external challenges during college, engage purposefully with campus career
development resources to prepare for their respective career fields (Miller & Kerr, 2003). Scholars and
practitioners alike continue to suggest intentional programming during college is necessary to prepare students for
life after college in career fields. Three recommendations are presented for contemporary practitioners who work
with athlete populations.
First, given the importance of intentional focus on career preparation for this population, practitioners who work
with athlete populations must work to achieve a stronger balance between athletic-specific and campus-wide career
development initiatives. As intercollegiate athletic practitioners seek to best incorporate evidence-based seminars,
courses, and workshops into athletes’ weekly routines, they should consider the athlete voice to determine how time
can be best spent. Moreover, findings from Baille and Danish (1992), Gaston-Gayles and Hu (2009), Lally and Kerr
(2005), Kennedy and Dimmick (1987), and Navarro (2012) illustrate that confining athletes solely to athleticspecific programming may inhibit networking opportunities and long-term career preparation. Moving forward,
athletic practitioners may seek to engage in intentional professional development activities with both campus-wide
student affairs professionals and potential employers to best serve athletes as they prepare for life after sport. For
example, rather than athlete-specific career fair events, athletic student affairs professionals may seek to work with
campus-based academic units to engage athletes in campus-wide career events.
Second, Baldwin and Blackburn (1981), Hall and Nougaim (1968), Osborn et al. (2007), and Savickas (2002)
discuss the importance of viewing career development as an evolutionary process. Therefore, it is suggested that
athletic practitioners work to provide career programming throughout the four-year experience as athletes will begin
to cognitively understand the importance of preparing for the transition to life after sport at different times. While
career development programs can often be of greatest focus for students in their senior year as the impending
transition draws near, practitioners must emphasize the importance of gradual preparation for this life change. By
modeling an evolutionary approach to career development, practitioners can assist students to cognitively process
and prepare for transition to career fields. In turn, athlete populations may begin to understand the transition to life
after sport is not just the end of their athletic participation but the beginning of a successful career as a contributor to
society.
Third, findings from Adler and Adler (1987), Blann (1985), Kennedy and Dimmick (1987), Murphy et al. (1996),
Sowa and Gressard (1983), and the included case study on career development patterns of athletes posit athletes’
sense of urgency to prepare for this transition appears to be further complicated as athletic responsibilities often take
precedence over personal and career development. In turn, practitioners may consider making select career
development programming a mandatory educational experience for athletes to ensure some focus is given to this area
amid other role expectations. For example, higher education professionals may consider exploring an undergraduate
course for credit that facilitates personal assessments to understand personal strengths and weaknesses, as well as
likes and dislikes. According to the findings from the case study, contemporary athletes continue to view academic
major selection as a foundational component of career preparation. Yet Case, Greer, and Brown (1987) and Fountain
and Finley (2011) argue that they fail to select majors that adequately align with
career aspirations. In turn, a course for credit may also include a distinct focus on
exploring possible academic majors across campus to ensure proper consideration
of alternatives.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment