Sport Transitions as Epiphanies

Abstract

Sport managers design development systems with the intent of retaining and advancing athletes through that system (Green, 2005). Important to this basic goal is the participant’s transition from one sport context to another. Transition research has focused primarily on elite athlete’s adaptation to career transitions as they advance at the highest levels or retire from sport (Wylleman & Lavallee, 2004). This orientation places a priority on the external transitions between sport structures before the internal, cognitive development of the athlete. This study examined the transitions of sport participants from an interpretive framework with the goal of understanding the individual’s experience of transition without it necessarily being linked to a typical external change. The sport stories of 48 students at a mid-sized, private university were collected and analyzed utilizing an interpretive paradigm. The disruption stage of these stories represents a time of crisis and transition. Denzin (2001) provided a typology for moments of crisis through four types of epiphanies: major, cumulative, illuminative, and relived. Using this typology of epiphanies can help sport managers to understand these transition events within the life of the participant. Analysis resulted in all disruptions being coded into one of the four original epiphany types. However, a large number of stories were categorized as major epiphanies. Further inductive coding yielded three sub-types of major epiphanies: major bodily, major life change, and major success. The stories within each type or subtype contained similarities in the speed of transition and the breadth of impact of the transition event. For example, stories of major bodily epiphany shared the immediate, life altering impact of significant injury while stories of cumulative shared the slow realization that the sport context had changed without the participant’s realization. Sport managers will be able to use the results of this study to understand and accommodate the pace and breadth of transition experienced by participants in their sport development systems thus maximizing the retention and advancement to the elite ranks.

Untitled

“…Thus, the purpose of this study was to understand DI and DIII collegiate athletes' experiences with transition into, through, and out of collegiate sport to further expand the literature and body of knowledge on athletic identity, the transition process, and how to provide holistic care for collegiate athletes. These experiences are important to understand as transition has been linked with mental health concerns (Blinde & Stratta, 1992;Fuller, 2014;Griffiths et al, 2016;Lally, JADE Bowling Green State University -https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/jade/ 2007; Leonard & Schimmel, 2016;McKnight et al, 2009;Papathomas & Lavallee, 2010;Papathomas et al, 2018;Petitipas et al, 2009;. To further this, athletic departments need institutional support, education, and programs for their athletes.…”

“…Literature has tied high athletic identity to problems transitioning out of sport and mental health concerns (Blinde & Stratta, 1992;Fuller, 2014;Griffiths et al, 2016;Hill et al, 2010;Lally, 2007;Leonard & Schimmel, 2016;McKnight et al, 2009;Papathomas & Lavallee, 2010;Papathomas et al, 2018;Petitipas et al, 2009;. Collegiate athletes who associate with a high athletic identity neglect other salient developmental identities (e.g., social, career) causing leaving sport to be more challenging and encompass more difficulty (Kidd et al, 2018;.…”

“…Thus, if high athletic identities linger throughout a collegiate athlete's career without development of social and career identities as well, they are at risk for mental health disorders when faced with this transition process (Blinde & Stratta, 1992;Fuller, 2014;Griffiths et al, 2016;Hill et al, 2010;Lally, 2007;Leonard & Schimmel, 2016;McKnight et al, 2009;Papathomas & Lavallee, 2010;Papathomas et al, 2018;Petitipas et al, 2009;Stokowski et al, 2019). Therefore, those working with the collegiate athlete population (e.g., coaches, administrators, academic support staff) must acknowledge the at-risk status of collegiate athletes, the presence of high athletic identity, and stress of the transition process (Stokowski et al, 2019).…”