A Comparative Study On The Methods Of Competitive Sports In Higher Education In China And America

The nature of the"whole nation system"that has long been carried out in the Chinese competitive sports is to bring into full play the superiority of the communists fixating on grand course and by employing the full strengths, wisdoms and powers of the whole nation to improve the overall capability of our nation's competitive sports. With the comprehensive deepening of the reform in the socialist market economy, the reform of the"whole nation system"is inevitable in the period of planned economy. Seen from the constant developmental tendency in the international competitive sports, the overall world competitive sports tend to become academy- oriented. In order to follow the trend of the sports development in the world, some universities in our country also take active actions, establishing high- level sport team to nurture sports talents and promoting the transition of competitive sports to academies.After the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games, universities in our country will shoulder more responsibilities to cultivate Olympic athletes. America, as the NO.1 in the world competitive sports gets 80% of its athletes from universities. Their experience of success is worth our learning. This paper points out the weaknesses of our country by comparing the different methods employed by China and America to develop college athletic talents. The following five aspects are compared:Firstly, this thesis compares the different management mechanism in china and U.S. universities: first, this thesis makes a comparison of the institution set up and divisory purview of the two; then of the leadership and servant in the management system; and at last of the operational mechanism in the two countries'athletic sports management.Secondly, it compares the enrollment mechanism in the universities of the two countries as in the following four aspects: first of all the administration organ for recruitment in universities in the two countries; then the quality censorship of the athletes of the two; the recruitment procedures and at last the recruitment channels of China and U.S. universities, thus making it clear the shortcomings of the universities in China.Thirdly, it compares the different solutions to conflicts in the two as are manifested in the following three aspects: study requirements of the athletes in the China and U.S. universities; then the training time and number of matches and at last the different inspiration organism employed by the China and U.S. universities.Fourthly, the author compares the different palestra establishments in the two countries taking Qinghua University, Huadong University of Science and Engineering and the Stanford University as cases, illustrating the deficiency of sports facilities in China.Fifthly, it makes a comparison of the organ of coachmen in the two countries in view of the following aspects: first of the selection system; then the education structure in the two countries and at last of the fixed number of working years for the coaches in China and U.S. universities. By comparison, the author finds:Firstly, there exist the following disadvantages in ourathletic sports management organism in the universities:(a)Organizational body is too easy and incomplete;(b)The administrative level id relatively single with most as longitudinal management;(c)The division of work is not clear and not good for the quick operation of the organ thus affecting the efficiency of the work.(d)The outlay of the university sport team is covered by the university education outlay, thus lacking in self- remedying mechanismSecondly, the following defects exist in the recruitment mechanism in higher education in China:(a)The recruitment body is unsound and has not functioned effectively as the management organ;(b)It lacks the regulated criteria;(c)It goes adrift from the Olympic strategy and is interest- oriented.Thirdly, there is no good solution to the conflicts between study and training.Fourthly, there is no enough palestra in universities and they are not made good use of due to the shortage of efficient operational mechanism.Fifthly, system of appointment is adopted in our country and there is no systematical training system for the coaches in China.