Numeracy and literacy in sports studies students: barriers to skills development

Rob Wilson is a Senior Lecturer in Sport Management at Sheffield Hallam University. He is involved in both academic and contracted research projects with the Sport Management and Culture teaching team and the Leisure Industries Research Centre. Rob now holds a University Teaching Fellowship within the Faculty of Health and Wellbeing and is examining alternative assessment methods. Trevor Hassall currently is Professor of Accounting Education at Sheffield Hallam University. He is the leader of the Accounting and Business Education Research Centre and has published extensively in professional and refereed journals. Specific research interests include the pedagogic use of case studies and the barriers to skills development. John Joyce is the Professional Portfolio Leader at Sheffield Hallam University and teaches on undergraduate, postgraduate and professional courses. He is an active member of the Accounting and Business Education Research Centre and has published extensively in professional and refereed journals. Specific interests include the development of vocational skills in accounting students. Mark Piekarz is a Senior Lecturer in Leisure and Sport Management. He has been involved with developing and designing many under-graduate and post-graduate programmes in sport and leisure management. He has been particularly active in developing reflective practices in teaching, learning and assessment. José Luis Arquero Montaño is Professor at the Universidad de Sevilla. He is the main researcher and coordinator of several research and training projects. Specific research interests include development of vocational skills in undergraduate and professional accounting students, barriers to skills development, teaching staff training, pedagogical innovations and learning styles. Vol. 5, No. 2. ISSN: 1473-8376 www.hlst.heacademy.ac.uk/johlste ACADEMIC PAPER Numeracy and literacy in sports studies students: barriers to skills development Robert Wilson (r.j.wils[email protected]), Trevor Hassall ([email protected]) and John Joyce ([email protected]) Sheffield Hallam University, Collegiate Hall, Collegiate Crescent, Sheffield, S10 2BP Mark Piekarz ([email protected]) The University of Worcester, Henwick Grove, Worcester, WR2 6AJ José Luis Arquero Montaño ([email protected]) Universidad de Sevilla, C/ S. Fernando, 4, C.P. 41004-Sevilla, Spain. DOI:10.3794/johlste.52.97    Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education Wilson, Hassall, Joyce, Piekarz, Arquero Montano (2006) Numeracy and Literacy in Sports Studies Students: Barriers to Skills Development Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education 5(2), 59-70. 60 Abstract Griffiths and Randall (2004) expressed concern about the key skills of numeracy and literacy in sports studies students. Studies of communication development and mathematics education have identified barriers to the development of these skills. The levels of mathematics anxiety and communication apprehension of sports studies students were measured at the beginning of the students' first year, prior to teaching. Following this the results for sport students were compared to students of other disciplines. The study suggests that it may be necessary to take measures to solve the specific problem of apprehension before skills development can take place. Keywords: Sports Studies, Numeracy, Literacy, Skills Development. Introduction There has been an increasing emphasis on the role of education as a specific preparation for the workplace. Employers and their representatives (Confederation of British Industry [CBI] 1991, Raggart and Williams, 1999) have stressed the need to develop a closer relationship between education and industry. European governments have expressed strong views on the reform of education and training. These views are in line with those of employers as evidenced by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD, 1994, 1995, 1996a, 1996b) which stated, “there is a common consensus that all children must master a core of essential knowledge and skills, and acquire the values and attitudes that prepare them effectively for adult life and the worlds of work and continued learning” (OECD 1996b: 103). The UK Government has overseen the identification of a set of key skills and has embedded them into the national qualifications system as part of its education and training policy (Department for Education and Employment [DfEE], 1999). Three of these key skills – application of number, communications and information technology – are seen as compulsory for most programmes of study. These key skills emanate from the demands of employers and are referred to as 'transferable', 'generic', 'personal' or 'core' and relate to an individual’s ability to operate in the workplace either alone or with others. Whilst some, for example Fryer (1997), see these key skills as central to the future life prospects of people entering the workplace, others have been more critical. Both Hyland and Johnson (1998), and Barnett (1994), have raised fundamental objections, both in terms of the definition of what a skill actually is and the extent to which transferability really exists. Green (1997) argued that the core skills approaches taken in the UK and USA are deficit models that try to make amends for inadequate schooling systems and that this compares unfavourably with the general, technical and vocational approach to education and training taken by France, Germany and Japan. To support this notion the national employers’ skills survey (Learning and Skills Council, 2003) found that over 10% of the English workforce (2.4 million workers) lack the skills needed to do their job. One fifth of all job vacancies (135,000 posts) remain unfilled because of a lack of skilled applicants. Poor basic skills cost a typical business employing 50 people £165,000 per year (Learning and Skills Council, 2003). The concerns relating to vocational skills, and ultimately their impact on the employment prospects of students, have been mirrored in the occupational area of Sport and Leisure Studies. In order to place our study in context a brief review of the sport and leisure industry is given below. Sport and leisure context Anecdotally, the sport and leisure industry is not always given the recognition it deserves in relation to its economic, social and political significance. Perhaps because sport is seen to operate in a leisure, recreational and tourism context, it is viewed as being a less serious industry. However, research shows that in terms of employment, the leisure sector contributes more than industries such as engineering, financial and business services, and the chemical, mineral and metal industries to the UK economy (Wolsey and Abrams, 2001). Furthermore, research conducted by the DfEE (1999) indicated that leisure related employment, including employment in sport, is estimated at more than 1.6 million jobs. Trends since 1988 have illustrated that the industry has seen significant growth in Wilson, Hassall, Joyce, Piekarz, Arquero Montano (2006) Numeracy and Literacy in Sports Studies Students: Barriers to Skills Development Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education 5(2), 59-70. 61 employment in the 10 years to 1998 and there is a projection of future growth (Wolsey and Abrams, 2001). In the light of this growth there has been a flourishing of related educational courses. Sport and leisure subjects are the fastest expanding and popular disciplines in Higher Education (HE), particularly sport-related courses (Hansen et al, 1998). According to Wolsey and Abrams (2001), there are currently 160 degrees awarded in 80 institutions and 79 post-graduate courses in 79 institutions. These reflect the booming industry. This growth in sports related educational courses is sometimes greeted by a certain amount of scepticism as to the academic rigour of these programmes. Usually, this is by the media who enjoy using the juxtaposition of people enjoying themselves and playing sport, with the idea of serious academic study. Yet sport, as already proposed, is a significant social and economic phenomenon, and as such needs to be managed using a variety of academic and business disciplines. It is also an industry which is increasingly marked by an enhancement of professionalism and where operations need to be more efficient and effective to ensure better return on investment (Smith, 2003). Whilst offering industry specific courses to under and post graduates is one thing, equipping them for the requirements of work is another. The 1987 White Paper (Higher Education: Meeting the Challenge, cited in Wolsey and Abrams, 2001), outlined the aspirations of the Thatcher Government for HE to provide courses which offered undergraduates with competencies and aptitudes relevant to the workplace, with particular attention to transferable skills. As a result, graduates would be more able to serve the economy and the companies they worked with. This evidence presents a clear case for the question regarding the current employability of graduates. The need for key skills in the industry has been investigated by Hansen et al (1998) and it has been shown that the aptitudes needed by graduates in the sport and leisure industry were: interpersonal and communication skills; self-motivation; the ability to work independently; time management; flexibility; adaptability; and the ability to work in a team. However, Wolsey and Abrams (2001) also suggested that the main problem with graduate employment is the perceptions of students and graduates. They do not appreciate the importance/relevance of the skills that they develop during a degree programme. As a result, when they apply for jobs they cannot articulate their transferable skills to the employer. The Institute of Leisure and Amenities Management (ILAM) have produced a 'skills barometer' (Griffiths and Randall, 2004) for a range of career pathways in the sport, leisure and tourism industry. It can be readily assumed that eight of these pathways are sport related: sport research; sport administration (voluntary/governing body); sport administration (public); sport facility management (public); sport facility management (private); and professional coaching and sport development. Through industry consultation, a variety of key skills were identified and ranked in relation to their relative importance for the specific career pathway. The skills identified were: literacy, numeracy, technical competence, management, social and interpersonal skills, and marketing. The ILAM study raised a number of constructive issues in relation to the skills required by the sport industry. The 'skills barometer' focussed on the skills of literacy, numeracy, technical competence, management, social and interpersonal and marketing, together with any subject specific skills that the pathway may require. The skills required varied according to the pathway. However, what is of particular relevance to this study is that numeracy, literacy, and social and interpersonal (communication) skills are ranked highly in all job specifications. The emphasis on numeracy reflects the nature of the business environment that sport operates in, although literacy and communication skills also form an integral part of any sport position. These findings match those of the DfEE (1999) and emphasise the need for such skills in the sport industry. Sport needs to be considered as a serious and important industry for the United Kingdom. Consequently the calls for a skilled and qualified workforce by the sport and leisure industry are as Wilson, Hassall, Joyce, Piekarz, Arquero Montano (2006) Numeracy and Literacy in Sports Studies Students: Barriers to Skills Development Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education 5(2), 59-70. 62 significant as that from any other employer. The question is do our graduates possess the necessary transferable skills to answer these calls? Barriers to skills development There have been many attempts to improve the personal skills of students in Higher Education. Stanga and Ladd (1990) note that despite the importance of communication skills, relatively little is known about the obstacles that students face when attempting to develop their communication abilities. Current thinking in communication has indicated a split between communication apprehension (CA) and communication development. There are indications, for example Allen and Bourhis (1996), and Spitzberg and Cupach (1984), that techniques aimed at the development of communication skills will not resolve communication apprehension. If an individual has a high level of apprehension then techniques will not result in improved communication performance. Therefore, in order for the effective development of communication skills to take place it is necessary to diminish the level of communication apprehension that an individual may feel. McCroskey (1984: 78) defines CA as, “an individual’s level of fear and anxiety associated with either real or anticipated communication with another person”. However, this fear can be typified as being 'trait' or 'state' (Richmond and McCroskey, 1989): an individual’s general unease in communication situations is seen as being a personal 'trait', whereas the fear of communicating in specific situations is referred to as 'state'. Individuals will exhibit both types of CA: they will have a general trait level of CA plus a state reaction to the specific context in which they are attempting to communicate. In the same way that CA interferes with the development of communication skills, the progress in numeric skills can be impeded by mathematics anxiety. Mathematics anxiety (MA) is characterised as, “feelings of tension and anxiety that interfere with the manipulation of numbers and the solving of mathematical problems in a wide variety of ordinary life and academic situations” (Richardson and Suinn, 1972: 551). Several studies have documented the negative effects of mathematics anxiety on mathematics performance and achievement (Betz, 1978; Brush, 1978; Dreger and Aitken, 1957; Gaudry and Spielberger, 1971; Suinn et al. 1972; Wigfield and Meece, 1988). More recent studies have built on these earlier works to suggest that mathematics anxiety can result from a wide range of factors. Factors such as: myths, teachers and parents have been listed by Steele and Arth (1998), and Trujillo and Hadfield (1999) include intellectual factors such as learning styles, persistence, self-doubt and dyslexia. Personality factors including low self-esteem, shyness and intimidation have also been shown to have an impact on mathematics anxiety (Fotoples, 2000; Levine, 1995). The importance of recognising and then dealing with mathematics anxiety is of great concern. Ashcraft (2002: 181) commented, "math (sic) anxiety disrupts cognitive processing by compromising ongoing activity in working memory. Although the causes of math anxiety are undetermined, some teaching styles are implicated as risk factors". This implies that contextual factors (i.e. 'state') can add to the inherent 'trait' levels possessed by specific individuals. Other lines of research have concentrated on suggesting ways in which teachers can reduce mathematics anxiety. Methods that have been suggested include: designing appropriate teaching practices (Cornell, 1999; Steele and Arth, 1998) and using alternative assessment (NCTM, 1995; Steele and Arth, 1998). Given the importance of MA and CA levels in the development of relevant abilities, the purpose of this study is to measure the levels of communication apprehension and mathematics anxiety in sports studies students immediately before they undertake their chosen courses at university. Simons et al. (1995) and Hassall et al. (2000) found evidence of gender differences in the levels of communication apprehension. This confirms the observation of Daly and Miller (1975) that women have significantly higher oral communication apprehension (OCA), but lower writing apprehension Wilson, Hassall, Joyce, Piekarz, Arquero Montano (2006) Numeracy and Literacy in Sports Studies Students: Barriers to Skills Development Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education 5(2), 59-70. 63 (WA), than male counterparts. Simons et al.’s results indicate that while females written communication apprehension was lower, it was not significantly so. Female students did, however, have significantly higher overall oral CA scores and higher scores associated with formal speaking contexts; namely, the meeting and public speaking subscale scores. These results are replicated in Hassall et al.’s study, and indicate commonalities between UK and US students. Similar gender differences were found in the levels of MA reported by students (Dew et al., 1983; Fox, 1977; Alexander and Matray, 1989), and differences on CA and MA levels and profiles, related to demographic characteristics, were tested. Research method In order to assess the levels of communication apprehension for this study, an instrument was developed that used as its basis: (i) the Personal Report of Communication Apprehension (PRCA-24) developed by McCroskey (1984) to measure oral communication apprehension (OCA), and; (ii) the written communication apprehension (WCA) instrument developed by Daly and Miller (1975) (both instruments can be found in Simons et al., 1995). The internal reliability and validity of these instruments are documented (McCroskey, 1984 and Bennett and Rhodes, 1988) The oral communication items consisted of four equal subsections - “group discussions”, “interviews”, “conversations” and “presentations” - and six questions were assigned to each. A pictorial representation of the areas is shown in Figure 1 below. Figure 1: Areas of communication In order to avoid any confusion or misunderstanding of these concepts, a definition of each relevant term was given in the questionnaire. (Where appropriate, the internal reliability statistics for this study are shown in Table 3.) The measurement of the levels of mathematics anxiety was done using the 25-item Math Anxiety Rating Scale (MARS), developed by Alexander and Matray (1989) from the 98-item MARS of Suinn (1972). The internal reliability and validity of this instrument is documented (Richardson and Suinn, 1972; Suinn and Edwards, 1982). The questionnaires were administered to first year students entering the sports studies area at Sheffield Hallam University. The students completed the questionnaire on their first or second day at the University in an introductory session prior to registration i.e. before any formal teaching had commenced or any information had been given to the students concerning the academic content of their chosen courses. The purpose of the study and the anonymity of students participating were explained in line with the University's guidelines on ethics in research. PRESENTATION INTERVIEW CONVERSATION GROUP INFORMAL FORMAL ORAL WRITTEN CA. GLOBAL Wilson, Hassall, Joyce, Piekarz, Arquero Montano (2006) Numeracy and Literacy in Sports Studies Students: Barriers to Skills Development Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education 5(2), 59-70. 64 Results The courses involved and the number of students from each course who completed the questionnaire are shown in Table 1. The questionnaire was directly administered to students and the response rate was 100% for every element of the selected sample. Wilson, Hassall, Joyce, Piekarz, Arquero Montano (2006) Numeracy and Literacy in Sports Studies Students: Barriers to Skills Development Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education 5(2), 59-70. 65 Course studying Number % age Law 175 18.8 Financial Services 33 3.5 International Business 97 10.4 Business &Technology 50 5.4 Nursing 76 8.2 Accounting 111 11.9 Sports Studies 147 15.8 Engineering 65 7.0 Business Studies 178 19.1 Total 932 100.0 Table 1: Composition of the overall sample Table 2 shows the composition of the whole sample, in relation to gender and educational background, for the sports studies sub-sample and other course sub samples. Gender Education background Male Female Total Numeracy/ Science Literate/ Arts Total Sports Studies 62.6 37.4 100 61.11 38.89 100 Others 46.8 53.2 100 45.87 54.13 100 Total 49.3 50.7 100 48.32 51.68 100 Significant at 1% level (Pearson’s Chi square two tail) Table 2: Gender and educational background by area As the data in Table 2 illustrate, the proportion of male students in the sports studies sub-sample was higher than in the other courses. Also, the percentage of students with a numerical/scientific educational background was significantly higher for sports studies programmes, as shown by a chi square test. Scale (1) Reliability Shapiro- Wilk sig. Mean Median St. Dev. Min Max Skewness Kurtosis Total Score CA - 0.928 129.38 130 21.82 63 193 -0.02 -0.08 Writing App. Score .917 0.002 62.95 62 13.20 25 112 0.29 0.08 CA Oral Score - 0.623 66.43 66 13.56 24 112 0.04 -0.07 Formal - 0.014 37.60 38 8.34 12 60 -0.05 -0.38 Interview Score .874 0.000 17.93 18 4.46 6 30 -0.13 -0.43 Presentation Score .894 0.000 19.67 20 5.06 6 30 -0.04 -0.52 Informal - 0.000 28.82 28 7.07 12 56 0.44 0.31 Group Score .860 0.000 14.75 14 4.32 6 30 0.48 0.30 Conversation Score .853 0.000 14.07 13 3.66 6 29 0.49 0.44 Mathematics Anxiety .918 0.000 59.59 58 16.46 26 116 0.52 0.07 (1) Cronbach’s alpha Table 3: Descriptives and statistics for scales (overall sample) Descriptive statistics of the scores (overall sample) are shown in Table 3. In this Table, normality tests results (Shapiro-Wilk) and internal reliability analysis of basic scales (Cronbach’s alpha) are provided. All basic scales appear to be highly reliable, with alpha values ranging from 0.85 to 0.93. Wilson, Hassall, Joyce, Piekarz, Arquero Montano (2006) Numeracy and Literacy in Sports Studies Students: Barriers to Skills Development Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education 5(2), 59-70. 66 The scales containing a reduced number of items (interview, presentation, group and conversation; 6 items each) have lower alpha values because there are fewer items in each section. However, all of them indicate very strong internal reliability, meaning that the results can be confidently used for comparative analysis. Although both the total CA and oral CA scores seem to follow a normal distribution, the normality test, skewness and kurtosis statistics indicate that the distributions of the basic scores depart from normality. As the composition of each sub sample is significantly different in relation to gender and educational background, a univariate comparison could be biased by the differences associated with the other variables. Therefore, multiple analysis of variance tests were performed. Although MANOVA is a parametric test, and requires the distribution of the variables to be normal, the F statistic on which the test is based is fairly robust against violations of the assumption of normality (Ferran Aranaz, 1999). The results of MANOVA are shown in Table 4. The results show that sport studies students have significantly higher levels (p=.022) of mathematics anxiety than the other students in the study. Both gender and educational background are shown to be related to mathematics anxiety. The study shows that female students and those students from a literate/art background have higher levels of mathematics anxiety (p<.01). In respect of communication apprehension scores, the results show significant differences (p = .002) in total communication score for students from differing academic backgrounds. This arises because of the significant difference in the writing apprehension scores (oral communication apprehension scores show no differences for educational background). There are significant differences in the total sample in terms of gender for formal communication apprehension. This applies to both the interview and presentation components. There are also significant differences in the presentation score between sports studies and other students (p= .005). Significance of F for sources of variation (1) area (2) gender (3) ed. background (1) by (2) (1) by (3) (2) by (3) (1) by (2) by (3) Model sig. Total Score CA n.s. n.s. 0.002 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 0.000 Writing App. Score n.s. n.s. 0.000 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 0.000 CA Oral Score n.s. 0.078 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 0.007 Formal 0.059 0.001 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 0.000 Interview Score n.s. 0.001 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 0.000 Presentation Score 0.005 0.012 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 0.000 Informal n.s. n.s. n.s. 0.091 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. Group Score n.s. n.s. n.s. 0.041 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. Conversation Score n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. Mathematics Anxiety 0.022 0.002 0.003 n.s. n.s. n.s. 0.072 0.000 Table 4: Multivariate analysis of variance results Table 5 shows the means for sports studies and others and the total population for each of the constructs measured. Wilson, Hassall, Joyce, Piekarz, Arquero Montano (2006) Numeracy and Literacy in Sports Studies Students: Barriers to Skills Development Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education 5(2), 59-70. 67 Study Area Gender Educational background Maths anxiety Writing app. score Group score Interview score Conversation score Presentation score Male num. / sci. 54.24 67.43 14.72 17.02 13.75 17.62 Sports Studies lit. / arts 63.72 61.30 15.41 17.35 15.16 18.78 Total 58.16 64.91 15.00 17.16 14.33 18.10 Female num. / sci. 67.42 66.91 14.51 18.46 13.74 19.03 lit. / arts 65.72 63.05 13.74 18.63 13.95 19.00 Total 66.82 65.56 14.24 18.52 13.81 19.02 Male num. / sci. 54.91 69.03 14.69 17.27 14.35 19.35 Others lit. / arts 60.48 60.74 14.19 17.16 14.05 18.95 Total 56.97 65.97 14.50 17.23 14.24 19.20 Female num. / sci. 57.33 65.45 15.39 18.87 14.24 21.17 lit. / arts 63.42 57.76 15.10 18.79 14.13 20.29 Total 61.46 60.12 15.19 18.82 14.16 20.56 Male num. / sci. 54.78 68.72 14.69 17.22 14.24 19.01 Total Studies lit. / arts 61.23 60.87 14.46 17.20 14.30 18.91 Total 57.22 65.75 14.60 17.21 14.26 18.97 Female num. / sci. 59.54 65.77 15.20 18.78 14.13 20.70 lit. / arts 63.57 58.10 15.01 18.78 14.11 20.21 Total 62.12 60.77 15.07 18.78 14.12 20.38 Table 5: Mean of scores for sub samples (basic scales) Discussion This study was based on data obtained from first year students at the commencement of the academic year. The students at this point in time had not had any formal contact with the academic staff from their respective disciplines. Therefore what was being measured was the scores that they effectively brought with them i.e. the scores are not the result of the development from the academic course they had chosen. The initial comparison is therefore undertaken on prospective students preparing to undertake an academic course in sports studies and a large sample of prospective students from a range of other disciplines. The results highlight a number of areas that give some cause for concern, or challenge some preconceived assumptions. The first indication is that sports studies students, in comparison with students on other programmes, possess a high degree of mathematics anxiety on commencement of their university studies. This would indicate that these students may feel apprehensive about using numbers in a variety of contexts, for example compiling budgets (an essential skill required in sport studies degree programmes). The concern is raised because when comparing this observation with, for example, the ILAM skills barometer, numeracy was a very important skill for most career pathways. According to the ILAM study, in all of the sport and leisure related pathways except two, numeracy was regarded as a significant skill, achieving between 60% and 90% in the 'relative importance' rating as a skill needed to do the job effectively. The pathways where it was less were the areas of sport development (52%) and professional coaching (48%) (ILAM, 2004). There must also be concerns about the progression of sport studies students through their chosen degrees. Richardson and Suinn (1972) and Suinn, Edie et al. (1972) have documented the negative effect of mathematics anxiety on mathematics performance and achievement. Moreover, the sports studies students in this sample had low levels of oral communication apprehension in formal situations, particularly presentations. This is encouraging when it is considered that presentations are a key ingredient in the educational programmes offered at University