|
Research
Impact of recreational sports participation on retention rates
New study shows participants are more likely to be retained
Researchers in the field of recreational sports are developing methods for studying the impact of recreational sport participation on student retention in higher education. Barcelona and Ross (2001) and Hall (2005) reported the positive impact participation in recreational sports had on student retention. Collins, et al., and Lindsay and Sessoms also found that recreational sport participation had a positive influence on retention within certain demographic variables.
Recently, another research study conducted at a four-year, public university in the midwest concluded that student use of indoor recreation facilities increases the likelihood that such students will be retained at the institution. In one of the most comprehensive studies on retention and recreational sports, the researchers considered the impact of recreational sport participation on retention on eight demographic variables: 1) gender, 2) ethnicity, 3) class standing, 4) age, 5) residence, 6) self-reported disability, 7) intercollegiate athlete, and 8) overall.
Frequency of entry was observed through the use of the recreational sports department’s card-swipe system. Rather than considering cumulative entries, the research only looked at students who entered the recreational sports center at least once during the academic year, and compared those frequencies with the students who did not enter the facility. The chi-square test of homogeneity was then utilized to compare the observed vs. the expected frequency of entry across the demographics that were studied. Data were tested using α= .05. The table below is a compilation of the results:
TABLE 1
|
|
|
Retained
|
Not Retained
|
|
|
|
|
Demographic
|
Total
|
n
|
%
|
n
|
%
|
df
|
x2
|
p
|
|
Gender
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Male
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
195.22
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
3891
|
2917
|
75.0%
|
974
|
25.0%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
1606
|
742
|
46.2%
|
864
|
53.8%
|
|
|
|
|
Female
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
435.91
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
5652
|
4572
|
80.9%
|
1080
|
19.1%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
2841
|
1431
|
50.4%
|
1410
|
49.6%
|
|
|
|
|
Student Diversity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asian
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
0.026
|
0.05
|
|
Participants
|
117
|
83
|
70.9%
|
34
|
29.1%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
72
|
50
|
69.4%
|
22
|
30.6%
|
|
|
|
|
African American
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
22.43
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
795
|
515
|
64.8%
|
280
|
35.2%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
263
|
99
|
37.6%
|
164
|
62.4%
|
|
|
|
|
Hispanic
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
6.87
|
0.01
|
|
Participants
|
119
|
95
|
79.8%
|
24
|
20.2%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
45
|
23
|
51.1%
|
22
|
48.9%
|
|
|
|
|
Caucasian
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
604.06
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
7981
|
6459
|
80.9%
|
1522
|
19.1%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
3832
|
1930
|
50.4%
|
1902
|
49.6%
|
|
|
|
|
Native American
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
6.44
|
0.025
|
|
Participants
|
42
|
37
|
88.1%
|
5
|
11.9%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
19
|
9
|
47.4%
|
10
|
52.6%
|
|
|
|
|
Class Standing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
125.04
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
3329
|
2096
|
63.0%
|
1233
|
37.0%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
794
|
199
|
25.1%
|
595
|
74.9%
|
|
|
|
|
Sophomore
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
128.82
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
2404
|
2041
|
84.9%
|
363
|
15.1%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
779
|
468
|
60.1%
|
311
|
39.9%
|
|
|
|
|
Junior
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
131.67
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
2112
|
1960
|
92.8%
|
152
|
7.2%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
1044
|
793
|
76.0%
|
251
|
24.0%
|
|
|
|
|
Senior
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
124.41
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
990
|
887
|
89.6%
|
103
|
10.4%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
699
|
421
|
60.2%
|
278
|
39.8%
|
|
|
|
|
Masters
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
48.397
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
442
|
369
|
83.5%
|
73
|
16.5%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
825
|
469
|
56.8%
|
356
|
43.2%
|
|
|
|
|
Doctoral
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
27.79
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
168
|
123
|
73.2%
|
45
|
26.8%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
150
|
32
|
21.3%
|
118
|
78.7%
|
|
|
|
|
Age
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-24
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
195.83
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
8565
|
6772
|
79.1%
|
1793
|
20.9%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
2761
|
1691
|
61.2%
|
1070
|
38.8%
|
|
|
|
|
25+
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
83.897
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
973
|
616
|
63.3%
|
357
|
36.7%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
1682
|
489
|
29.1%
|
1193
|
70.9%
|
|
|
|
|
Residence
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commuters
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2292.77
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
7034
|
6819
|
96.9%
|
215
|
3.1%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
3840
|
1804
|
47.0%
|
2036
|
53.0%
|
|
|
|
|
Resident Students
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
58.86
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
2509
|
670
|
26.7%
|
1839
|
73.3%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
607
|
369
|
60.8%
|
238
|
39.2%
|
|
|
|
|
Users with Disabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
147.61
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
489
|
476
|
97.3%
|
13
|
2.7%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
169
|
81
|
47.9%
|
88
|
52.1%
|
|
|
|
|
Athletes
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2.76
|
0.05
|
|
Participants
|
383
|
344
|
89.8%
|
39
|
10.2%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
21
|
16
|
76.2%
|
5
|
23.8%
|
|
|
|
|
OVERALL
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
612.96
|
0.001
|
|
Participants
|
9543
|
7489
|
78.5%
|
2054
|
21.5%
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Participants
|
4447
|
2173
|
48.9%
|
2274
|
51.1%
|
|
|
|
Although the results are positively impacted by the sample size of each demographic category, the results indicate significant impact of student use of a recreational sport facility on retention. Studies such as this one show that recreational sports add value through their ability to retain students, thereby contributing to the financial well-being of an institution.
For further information, contact Dr. Paul R. Milton, Editor of the Recreational Sports Journal, 419-207-6165, pmilton@ashland.edu.
|
