Enhancing
“Coopetition”:
A Model for Physical
Activity Courses
Rebecca Buchanan, Ph.D.
Daniel Carter
DC Cobler, Ed.D.
Beth Funkhouser, M.Ed.
Beverly Hatch, M.Ed.
Joy Scruggs, M.S.
Physical Education Department, Emory & Henry College, Emory, VA
overview
• INTRODUCTION
• PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
• RESEARCH QUESTIONS
• DEFINITIONS OF KEY TERMS
• SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
• METHODOLOGY
• DISCUSSION
• CONCLUSIONS
introduction
ETLA 103 SURVEY
When you do participate in
physical activity, do you prefer a
competitive or non-competitive
atmosphere?
Overall
Competitive: 67.5%
Non-competitive: 32.5%
(Link to activities)
Male: 86.3% Competitive
Female: 50.8% Non-competitive
Purpose
• To determine the extent to which the
physical activity courses reflected the
pleasure and participation model
(Coakley, 2007)
• To determine the extent to which
student experiences in the course
reflected characteristics of the model.
Physical activity
courses
• Yoga
• Kayaking
• Fly Fishing
• Archery
• Introduction to
Adventure
Training
• Rock Climbing
• Bowling
• Ballroom
Dance
• Hiking /
Backpacking
• Self Defense for
Women
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
 In what ways do the physical activity
courses reflect the pleasure and
participation sports model?
 To what extent do student experiences in
the course reflect characteristics of the
model?
KEY TERMS
Pleasure and Participation
Sports Model
“emphasizes democratic leadership,
inclusive participation, and the use of
cooperation and competition with others to
develop and test skills in a healthy and
enjoyable context”
Coakley, 2009, p. 674
KEY TERMS
Power and Performance
Sports Model
“framework for an organizational structure
emphasizing hierarchical leadership, exclusive
participation, and the use of strength, speed,
and power to push human limits and dominate
opponents in the quest for competitive success”
Coakley, 2009, p. 675
KEY TERMS
Co-opetition
Simultaneous combination of cooperative
and competitive behavior
Brandenburger & Nalebuff, 1996
Note: can be spelled without a hyphen
SIGNIFICANCE OF
STUDY
Economic cost of physical inactivity
Physical inactivity risk factors
Young adult participation
Types of opportunities offered
METHODOLOGY
Type of Approach
Theoretical Framework
Data Collection Procedures
Data Analysis Procedures
Methods of Verification
theoretical
framework
data collection
• Observations
• Interviews
data ANALYSIS
• Category construction
• Code mapping
DISCUSSION
• ENVIRONMENT
• INSTRUCTORS /
INSTRUCTOR
PHILOSOPHIES
• TYPES OF
SPORTS
• WELLNESS
CONCLUSIONS
• Limitations
• Implications
• Future
Research
THANK YOU!
Special thanks to McGraw Hill Publishing
for funding this research study!
Thank you for attending this session!
Questions????
CONTACT
INFORMATION
Emory & Henry College
Physical Education Department
Beverly Hatch - bshatch@ehc.edu (Chair)
Rebecca Buchanan – rbuchanan@ehc.edu
Daniel Carter – dcarter10@ehc.edu
DC Cobler – dccobler@ehc.edu
Beth Funkhouser - bfunkhouser@ehc.edu
Joy Scruggs – jscruggs@ehc.edu