The Tie That Binds? A Case Study of Student Perceptions of Their Recreation-Related Majors (Research Articles) (Case Study‪)‬

Many college students begin their parks, recreation, tourism, therapeutic recreation, sports management, or outdoor recreation major (referred to hereafter as recreation-related major) with a narrow view of their academic path. These students usually have a specific career in mind such as becoming a park ranger, a recreation therapist, or an athletic director. The field of parks and recreation as defined 50 years ago has become more diversified today (Henderson, Bialeschki, Hemingway, Hodges, Kivel, & Sessoms, 2001), and many students appear to hold a narrow view regarding their specialty (Godbey, 2000). Although specializations seem to provide students with many opportunities, they also may dilute the coherence of a professional field. The invited papers that appeared in the 2008 volume of Schole, for example, addressed one example of professional diversity regarding the role of sport management within traditional parks and recreation departments in higher education. Dustin and Schwab (2008) argued that sport management was an uncomfortable partner for academic parks and recreation departments. Among the points made, Dustin and Schwab argued that sports management can undermine park and recreation faculty members' professional purpose. The responses to Dustin and Schwab provided counterpoints about how sport management compliments traditional park and recreation academic departments (e.g., Gibson, 2008; Howard, 2008; McDonald, 2008; Wellman & Rea, 2008). This discussion sparked questions about the collective identity within recreation-related academic departments that often include a variety of specialized areas. Exploring further whether a collective identity exists may be useful.