A Difference Study On The Management Of Student Athletes In Chinese And American Universities

With the development of the market economy, the three-level cultivation mode of athletes in China can not match the needs of development in a sense that a series of problems are exposed. For instance, there are difficulties in the resettlement of the retired professional athletes, difficulties in the discovery of good talents and in the academic education of athletes. Under this circumstance, a new cultivation mode which incorporates physical and professional education is put forward. The new mode is conducive to the sustainable development of competitive sports in China. In America, 50% athletes are cultivated by colleges and universities which is regarded as the base of high-quality talents of competitive sports. Therefore, the management experience of American universities is good reference for cultivation and management of Chinese athletes in colleges and universities.In this present paper, literature research, interview method, logical analysis and comparative analysis is adopted to discuss the differences in athletes management of Chinese and American universities. The paper aims to find out the insufficiency of China’s athletes management and to learn the advanced experience of America. At the same time, the exploratory countermeasures are put forward to further improve and strengthen the management of athletes in Chinese universities and to ensure the cultivation and management of large quantities of high-quality talents. In the end, conclusion is summarized based on this study.In the first place, it is found that the athletes quantity, university recruitments, sport programs and increase of sports categories are not in proportion. In the meantime, it is the trend to discuss the management of athletes in universities.In the second place, some differences are found in the athletes recruitment of colleges and universities. In America, there is an organization which is responsible for athletes recruitment of all colleges and universities, which is based on unified qualification standards and detailed admissions process. It is also found that American universities prosses no autonomy in the enrollment of athletes. On the contrary, there is no unified association, qualification standards and recruitment regulation in China which works for the enrollment of athletes. Chinese universities and colleges have autonomy to make decisions.In the third place, based on the comparison of American experience and China’s shortcoming in the recruitment management of athletes, two facts are presented in this paper. As to the shortcoming of China, it lacks a unified enrollment organization and standards. Chinese universities give much preference to physical performance instead of academic performance and the enrollment autonomy cause to the low transparency of athletes admissions. Meanwhile, it is enlightened that it is necessary to set up an association which works for athletes recruitment, formulation of unified standard and strict norms in the communication between candidates and universities. It is also suggested that all candidates participate in a unified academic exam in China and that the time of athletes recruitment be the first two month after the national college entrance examinations.In the fourth place, this study finds that American athletes embrace the same standard with student in other specialties in the aspect of academic performance and learning management However, the situation in China is that colleges and universities usually set a low academic performance standard for athletes, which degrades student athletes’cultural attainment.In the fifth place, Chinese universities set strict limitation on specialty choice of athletes and athletes are constrained into limited optional and professional discipline categories. The standards for academic is in low level. Much preference is given physical performance and the athletes management is not flexible in China. Based on the study of American experience, it is suggested that students should have right to chose the specialty. In the management, universities can implement the credit system and extend athletes academic years.The six place is mainly in the aspect of training and competition management. The NCAA in America set a strict regulation in the training time of athletes and students can chose the time of training. American universities adopt "assembly line" training form. Chinese colleges and universities has no unified regulation on training time and student athletes have no right to chose training time. Comparatively speaking, Chinese universities adopt "one package training" mode.In the seventh place, Chinese athletes’training time is short and inflexible and their specialty training is in low degree. From the experience of America, training time can be increased into 20 hours. We can ease the training restriction and let athletes chose training time. At the same time, we can increase coaches to ensure the training program.The eighth place mainly focuses on balance of academic performance and physical performance. American universities usually stimulate students athletes’ enthusiasm in academic study and physical training through credit system, flexible choice of training time scholarship and competition qualifications, which incorporates learning and training in a better way. On the contrary, Chinese colleges and universities usually sacrifice students learning time to extend their training time, which cause the low academic performance of athletes.In the ninth place, experience of American universities can better solve the contradiction of athletes academic performance and physical performance. Base on comparison study in the paper, it is suggested that Chinese universities can extend the academic years of athletes and develop a flexible choice system of training time. In the meantime, Chinese universities can set sports scholarships and formulate a strict and high academic and physical standards for candidates.