The purpose of this study sought to investigate factors that influence studentathletes' satisfaction with academic services within athletics departments. Additionally, we examined the relationship between student-athletes' satisfaction and academic performance (i.e., GPA). A total of 226 NCAA Division I studentathletes from a Midwestern university competing in a mid-major conference participated. A survey consisting of 22 questions was created to assess the satisfaction of the four major factors (facilities, staff, tutoring, and advising programs) of academic advising services. Results revealed that student-athletes were satisfied with academic services, but satisfaction differed among class levels, with freshman athletes reporting lower levels of satisfaction than junior and senior athletes. Additional results showed that facilities and staff have significant influences on student-athletes' satisfaction with academic services. Furthermore, there was a significant relationship between student-athletes' satisfaction and GPA. The findings provide partial support for the proposed theoretical model, which suggests that athletics departments should provide adequate, accessible academic facilities and hire properly-trained staff.

No abstract

What do a lighthouse and an autoethnography have in common? Whether symbolically or literally, both elements seek to help to navigate through rough waters by providing warnings and guidance. Using this powerful analogy, the editors Stephen Hancock, Ayana Allen, and Chance W. Lewis (2015) crafted a powerful narrative, titled Autoethnography as a Lighthouse: Illuminating Race, Research, and the Politics of Schooling as a volume in the book series Contemporary Perspectives on Access, Equity, and Achievement, edited by Chance W. Lewis and published by Information Age. As poignantly stated right at the beginning of the introductory chapter, the primary aim of this collective work is to “move from invisibility to visibility and silence to voice” (Hancock, Allen, & Lewis, 2015, p. 3). Ultimately, this book attempts to lend voice to often marginalized and “othered” scholars who conduct autoethnographic research from a racial, gendered, and critical theoretical framework, which is the so-called culturalized autoethnography. Equally important, however, this edited volume aims to serve as a lighthouse to the readers—illuminating pathways through which readers might navigate more knowledgeably and consciously through the deeply entangled intersections of race, research, and school politics.