Use double quotes to find documents that include the exact phrase: "aerodynamic AND testing"

Most university and college athletic departments have policies that directly prohibit hazing practices. However, research revealed that hazing-related policy was often buried in broader codes of conduct or addressed in harassment and abuse policies, or that policies were poorly implemented and enforced. Creating hazing-specific policy can help organizations address and prevent hazing. Learn more in the SIRCuit.

Many athletes and leaders continue to believe that hazing contributes to team cohesion. Yet research reveals that hazing can have the opposite effective and can fracture relationships amongst teams and between players. Coaches and athlete leaders can use education to debunk the mythical relations between hazing and team cohesion, and use alternative activities to build positive relationships amongst team members. Learn more in the SIRCuit.

Allegations emerging in media reports from Toronto’s St. Michael’s College in the fall of 2018 have made hazing top of mind for athletic staff at Canada’s secondary and post-secondary education institutions. Unfortunately, it is not an isolated event. Reports of hazing have emerged from a number of Canadian institutions in the past decade, including Laurentian University (2016), McGill University (2015), and Dalhousie University (2014 and 2013).

Hazing is a cultural practice that has been established and perpetuated for decades with harmful repercussions within, but not limited to, the military, high schools, sport, fraternities and sororities. In 2016, we undertook a study of hazing practices and knowledges in Canadian university sport, surveying student athletes, coaches and athletic directors across the country. Until that time, little was known about the pervasiveness of hazing in varsity athletics. Findings revealed that  64% of Canadian varsity athletes were engaged in some form of hazing, and that new varsity athletes transitioning from high school fully expected to be hazed (for additional findings, click here). Similar studies surveying NCAA athletes found that upwards of 80% of all athletes experienced some form of hazing and only 20% described the experience as positive (Hoover and Pollard, 2000).

The Search for Solutions

A number of challenges occur in attempts to eliminate hazing in sport. These include: a vague definition of hazing; unclear and poorly enforced policy; a lack of education; the persisting belief that hazing contributes to group bonding, cohesion and team success; and a powerful code of silence surrounding hazing activities. This article will address each of these barriers, providing insight to help tackle the issues and create a new hazing-free culture in sport.

Defining Hazing

Hazing is often defined as “an event created to establish a team’s social hierarchy by humiliating, degrading, abusing and/or endangering newcomers regardless of a person’s willingness to participate in order to reinforce their social status on the team.”

However, research reveals significant differences in the meaning of hazing (Waldron & Kowalski, 2009). For example, athletes express that hazing could be good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable. Creating a shared definition of hazing will provide a foundation for shifts in policy, practice, and beliefs.

Strengthen Policy

A good policy can provide support for organizational and cultural change. In Canada, most university and college athletic departments have policies that directly prohibit hazing practices. However, research revealed that hazing-related policy was often buried in broader codes of conduct or addressed in harassment and abuse policies, or that policies were poorly implemented and enforced.

Organizations are encouraged to create a specific hazing relating policy. The policy should include a clear definition of hazing like that provided above, with specific examples along the spectrum of hazing behaviour – these could range from being forced to sing/perform or wear something in public, to being forced to consume alcohol, to sexualized hazing. The policy should also provide clearly defined sanctions. These could include the suspension or expulsion of athletes, the cancellation of a team’s season, loss of funding, and the suspension of firing of staff, Finally, in conjunction with launching the policy, an open pathway for athletes and other stakeholders to report hazing infractions should be established. This could be a hotline or confidential email address where reports could be directed.

Educate

For successful implementation, policy must be supported by education and awareness initiatives. Education is essential to developing a deeper understanding of hazing, debunking myths that hazing contributes to team cohesion, and challenging entrenched and sometimes hidden practices. Educational efforts must be extended not only to athletes but to all team staff, administrators, organizational leaders, parents and fans. Efforts should also adopt an ongoing approach, similar to those taken to regulate the use and abuse of performance enhancing substances. Champions from across the stakeholder groups can help keep the issue top of mind and relevant.

Breaking the Code of Silence

A code of silence often surrounds hazing practices. As mentioned previously, our study revealed the expectation of new athletes entering university that they would be hazed. This perceived reality suggests that 1) young athletes are aware of hazing and may have experienced hazing prior to entering the post-secondary education system; and 2) that athletes knowingly enter a culture where they could be abused over the course of their varsity experience. New athletes joining an established team during their transition into university are at a vulnerable state in their psychological, physical and social development, and in their position on the team. Our findings indicated that most athletes identified that it would be highly unlikely that they would feel as though they could come forward with issues surrounding being hazed. Through our 20 plus years of research in this field, we heard stories of athletes who choose not to go to certain schools because of the hazing practices, and of athletes who left athletic programs because they were ostracized and marginalized as a result of hazing.

Also contributing to the code of silence surrounding hazing is its normalization. Hazing typically happens through a cyclical process, whereby first year athletes are hazed, then become the ones who haze through a “it was done to me, so I get to do it to them” mentality. Hazing thus becomes “normal” for athletes in that culture, and can often carry on for years. For example, in light of the recent St. Mike’s allegations of sexualized hazing, many former students have been coming forward with stories of the same thing happening to them, going back 30, 40, 50 years (e.g. https://toronto.citynews.ca/2018/11/17/st-michaels-college-school-hazing).

Finally, we found coaches and administrators often turned a blind eye or distanced themselves from hazing. However, our study indicated that coaches can be the largest influence in changing the culture of hazing when they are actively engaged in educating and working with team leaders to introduce alternative orientations. Coaches and other institutional staff have a responsibility to know what is going on within their teams – leaders must take a proactive approach to addressing the issues and leading the necessary cultural change. The more transparent this system can be, the better chance we have of cultural change.

Hazing practices are often justified by persisting beliefs about their centrality to building team cohesion. Yet our research revealed that hazing can have the opposite effective and can fracture relationships amongst teams and between players. In November 2018, former NHLer Dan Carcillo came forward in the media to speak of the psychological scars he carries as a result of being hazed while in the Ontario Hockey League. Educational and communication efforts that that debunk the mythical relations between hazing and team cohesion, and address the short- and long-term impacts on the physical and mental health of athlete, can open the doors to alternative practices.

Establishing New Practices

Creating new traditions to replace hazing has benefits for all involved. The rite of passage and marking the transition onto the team is an important tradition to preserve, we just need to address the way it is being done and why. A variety of activities can be used to welcome new members while instilling a sense of pride and identity with each team’s unique signature. Athlete leaders and key staff should work together to design new activities to replace potentially harmful and damaging hazing activities – alternatives are limited only by the team’s imagination. Activities should include all team members and key staff, and support the development of healthy relationships by building trust, mutual respect, and the identification of shared goals and values that will provide a foundation for the season ahead. Administrators should designate resources to support these positive practices.

Suggested alternatives include:

Concluding Comments

To truly shift the culture of hazing in Canada, we need to create a transparent and open culture where abuse and harassment cannot take place. Effective policy, knowledge and education, open dialogues, investment in healthy alternatives, and strong systems of support are paramount towards that end.

An important step towards change is a commitment from athletes, coaches, team support staff, administrators, alumni, parents, fans and the public to speak up to disrupt normalized hazing behavior and lend their support to positive practices that are proven to build team cohesion and support performance. In particular, sport leaders have a responsibility to recognize the serious nature of hazing and take action to ensure the safety of athletes within and beyond formal sport settings. The overall goal is to ensure that sport is a place where all athletes are treated with respect and dignity.

Recommended Resource

Transforming team bonding to a safe and positive experience© – A toolkit for hazing education: Understanding, prevention & transformation

This resource provides a step-by-step workshop that can be led by coaches, administrators or even athletes, and includes power point slides, suggested group work and discussions, and team building activities. For more information contact Dr. Jay Johnson at the University of Manitoba – jay.johnson@umanitoba.ca

Good team cohesion is a key factor for success, but can create pressure for team members to conform. Research conducted with NCAA athletes found that those who more closely identified with their team were more likely to adapt to their teammates’ behaviour. This held true for both risky (e.g. drinking and driving, concealing concussion) and prosocial (e.g. volunteering) behaviours. Building a team’s identity around positive behaviours can create productive ways for athletes to experience and demonstrate team pride and connection, without the pressure to engage in risky behaviour.

Hazing is defined as “an event created to establish a team’s social hierarchy by humiliating, degrading, abusing and/or endangering newcomers regardless of a person’s willingness to participate in order to reinforce their social status on the team.” Research shared at the 2017 SCRI Conference revealed that many athletes did not report hazing events because they felt that experiencing hazing was part of being a member of a team. Read more about the research results in the SIRCuit.

As researchers and educators who have been (and still are!) extensively involved in sport, back to school time also means back to school SPORT time! Through our personal experience and our research, we know firsthand the positive impact that participation in sports can have on child development. We are also acutely aware that many children and youth do not have the chance to attain these benefits as they are cut from teams, burnt out by single sport specialization or simply never provided an opportunity to play. For those in schools and communities involved with sports programs (coaches, parents, principals, teachers, rec leaders, etc.) it is important to be aware of both sides of the coin. Sports are good for kids BUT not all kids are able to play. Yet.

During the 2018 Winter Olympics, many people became familiar with the Norwegian approach to youth sport:

In Norway, children are encouraged to join local sport clubs to help with their social development but there are strict rules, which prevent anyone from keeping score — no one can be ranked first to last until they turn 13. “We want them to be in sports because they want to be,” Tore Øvrebø, head of the Norwegian team, explained to CNN Sport. The focus is on other aspects, he says, not the competitive side. “Instead (of winning) they want to have fun and they want to develop not only as athletes but as social people.”

“Our vision is sport for all. Before you are 12 you should have fun with sport. So we don’t focus on who the winner is before then. Instead we are very focused on getting children into our 11,000 local sports clubs.” Tom Tvedt, President of Norway’s Olympic Committee. (The Guardian)

In contrast to the Norwegian approach, in both our research and experiences as coaches and parents, we have seen something quite different. As an example, this quote is from a parent in response to a previous blog about cutting (de-selection):

I just read your blog and I wanted to tell you about my son’s experience in tryouts. My son is 8 (that’s right, only 8) he was on a Tier 1 team.  His team was really good and then after the season, they had tryouts for the next season.  The tryouts were two 1-hour tryout sessions.  At the end of the 2nd day, all of the players were called into a circle around the coaches.  If you made one of the teams, your name was called and you were given a piece of paper to give to your parents to register you for the team.  After all of the papers were given out, the rest were told they did not make a team. A couple of boys from his team did not make the roster of the new team.  They just sat there while the rest of their old teammates screamed with joy. This made me sick.

As professionals in physical education who have played and coached sport at a variety of levels, comments like this about Canadian sport make us cringe. The current problems with participation and engagement in youth sport (e.g., sport drop out [Crane & Temple, 2015]; decline in sport participation during adolescence [Zimmerman-Sloutskis, Zimmerman, & Martin, 2010]; sport specialization [Jayanthi et al., 2013]) led us to begin a program of research that includes to date: surveys of over 1,600 coaches and athletic directors (Junior and High Schools); 52 interviews with young athletes (ages 13-18 years old) who had been cut in the past and their parents; a case study of re-imagined sport at a junior high school and; research into alternative models of sport that endeavour to increase participation and keep kids playing as along as possible. This article will provide strategies to improve de-selection practices and offer alternative sport models to increase youth participation in sport.

Easing the Pain of Cutting

Findings from our research confirm that de-selection cuts deep (Gleddie, Sulz, Humbert & Zajdel, in press). There are negative emotional, social and physical consequences. Athletes lose friends and are forced to find new social circles. They question their own identities and can feel lost and adrift. Perhaps quite obviously, their self-esteem is shaken. Time spent being physically active is reduced – not being on the team means no more practices and games. Cutting also deterred athletes from future participation in the same sport, due to low perceptions of ability in that sport. As well, when no specific feedback was provided as to why athletes were cut there was a tendency to assume a low level of skill and a prediction of future failure. The same results happened when athletes were given feedback about things they can’t change like, “You’re too short”.

For coaches, there are four factors that can improve the experience for de-selected athletes:

As well, the athletes told us that the best way to help them cope with being cut is to provide clear reasons in a face-to-face meeting. Specifically, meetings should include:

Re-Imagining Sport for Children and Youth

Recently, Canada received a disappointing “D+” on physical activity levels (ParticipACTION Report Card 2018). Only 35% of 5-17 year-olds are meeting the recommended guidelines of a minimum of 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity daily. Participation in organized sport did a bit better, a “B”, with 77% of 5-17 year olds participating in organized physical activity or sport. We feel that Canadian sport can do even better. Through our research, we’ve heard from teachers and coaches that are using a range of innovative approaches to shift the typical mindset from cutting and “riding the pine” towards an education-focused model of athlete development. Here are a few examples (some of which we are beginning to research):

Shifting the Culture

Our goal as coaches and researchers is to keep as many young people participating in sport as possible. To achieve this goal, it is important to consider alternative sport models that encourage participation and long-term involvement in sport. We need to work together at all levels (school, community, club and elite), with all stakeholders (parents, sport organizations, government, researchers, coaches and especially the kids) to take the following steps:

Together, we can ensure that Canada becomes the BEST place in the world to be a kid and play sport.

Hazing is a complex issue that is entangled in the culture and tradition of Canadian University sport.  Hazing is defined as an event created to establish a team’s social hierarchy by humiliating, degrading, abusing and/or endangering newcomers regardless of a person’s willingness to participate in order to reinforce their social status on the team. Anecdotal reports and growing research indicate that hazing persists among university athletes, yet to date, we did not have foundational data to provide a baseline for understanding hazing trends across Canada.

Jay Johnson and the panel at the 2017 SCRI Conference

This study was a multi-year initiative to explore the prevalence and nature of hazing among student athletes within Canadian Interuniversity Sport (CIS)-now U Sports. Specifically, the study:

  1. Investigated the prevalence and nature of hazing behaviours among student athletes in the CIS with a particular focus on gender rates,
  2. Investigated existing strategies within athletic programs to manage hazing activities among university sponsored teams;
  3. Examined policies for the development of strategies to enhance policy effectiveness;
  4. Provide research-based strategies to sport administrators for responding to and preventing hazing among CIS student athletes; and
  5. Provide a template for the transfer of knowledge by which other sport organizations such as secondary schools, community sport or regional/national teams can address the hazing within their programs.

Athletes in the current study indicated that common hazing practices included those of public humiliation and degradation. Moreover, athletes reported that coaches were not only aware of hazing behaviours, but also present while hazing behaviours occurred. Athletes who experienced hazing perceived more positive outcomes of hazing than negative, and did not report hazing incidents because they believed experiencing hazing was part of being a member of the team. Finally, only a small percentage of athletes had participated in hazing prevention workshops. Taken together, the results provide evidence that hazing in Canadian athletics is highly prevalent, and that more hazing prevention interventions are needed for not only athletes but also coaches.

Research methods

This study was a mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) endeavor.

Stage One was the survey component of data collection which included web-based surveys in French and English of student athletes at Canadian universities. This consisted of a random sample population of U Sports student athletes across all sports played, which includes 52 institutions and 21 sports with men and women combined.

Stage Two was the interview component which included follow-up interviews with individual on-campus student athletes at sample institutions and individual on-campus interviews with coaching staff and athletic administrators at sample institutions across Canada. Individual interviews (of approximately 60-120 minutes in duration) were conducted from a regional sample structure to represent the breadth of Universities across Canada, and were conducted in equal numbers of men and women student athletes and coaches, across sports.

 Research results

Stage one

A total of 434 U Sports (formerly known as Canadian Interuniversity Sport) athletes from various universities across Canada participated in the current study. Of these participants, 201 were male and 233 were female. Eighty-four percent of participants were between the ages of 18-22 years, 13.60% between the ages of 23-26 years, 1.20% between the ages of 27-30 years, and 0.70% older than 31 years. The racial and ethnic make-up of the sample varied, with 4.80% of athletes identifying as Asian, 5.30% as African Canadian, 1.30% as First Nations, 1.10% as Hispanic or Latino, 1.10% as Pacific Islander, 81.80% as White, and 3.70% as other. Approximately 2% of survey respondents chose not to disclose their race/ethnicity. The majority of participants were full-time students (97.56%), while a small portion were part-time students (2.44%). Thirty percent of students were first-year undergraduates, 21.47% were second-year undergraduates, 18.66% were third-year undergraduates, 15.58% were fourth-year undergraduates, 9.72% were fifth- and sixth-year undergraduates, and 3.92% were enrolled in graduate studies.

Participants belonged to various varsity-level (93.50%) and club-level (13.10%) sports, with football (40.50%), soccer (9.25%), and ice hockey (9.25%) being the most popular sports for males, and basketball (18.03%), soccer (17.17%), and rugby (12.02%) being the most popular sports for females. Athletes were also asked to rate their overall experience as an athlete on their team. The majority (72.53%) of athletes reported their experience as mostly positive, 24.24% reported their experience as both positive and negative, and 1.34% reported their experience as mostly negative.

Hazing Experiences

To assess athletes’ experiences with hazing behaviours, a list of 22 hazing behaviours was presented to the athletes. For each behaviour, athletes were asked to indicate whether the respective behaviour: (a) happened to them; (b) happened to others on the team; (c) happened to them and others on the team; or (d) never happened to them or others on the team (see Table 1). Results showed that 57.8% (n = 251) of athletes indicated that at least one of the hazing behaviours happened to them and others on the team. Frequent hazing behaviours that happened to athletes and others on their team included: wearing embarrassing clothing (30.20%); singing or chanting in public at an unrelated sport event, practice, or game (28.10%); attending a skit night or roast (18.20%); drinking or eating vile concoctions (15.90%); being yelled, screamed, or cursed at by others (15.70%); associating with specific people and not others (11.10%); and acting as a personal servant to other members (10.40%). Females (56.57%) reported experiencing more hazing behaviours than males (43.43%).

Self-reported hazing. Athletes were asked to indicate whether they had ever been hazed. Of the athletes who reported experiencing at least one of the hazing behaviours that met the definition of hazing, 59% reported that they had been hazed, 34.30% reported that they had not been hazed, and 6.80% were unsure. Participants who had self-identified as having been hazed reported that hazing occurred across a range of different organizations, including varsity sport teams (86.08%), intramural club sports (20.93%), bands (20.62%), performing arts organizations (20.10%), military organizations (20%), other types of organizations (15.15%), and recreational clubs (9.48%). In terms of athletes’ involvement in hazing others, most indicated that they had never participated in hazing someone else (74.42%), and never participated in hazing activities as part of their team (70.55%).

Knowledge of Hazing

From the list of hazing behaviours that were provided, 38.02% of athletes indicated they were aware of such behaviours prior to joining the team, 48.34% indicated they were unaware of such behaviours, and 13.55% indicated they were somewhat aware. Fifty-three percentage of athletes had heard of members from other teams at their university engaging in hazing behaviours, and 28.89% had witnessed members from other teams engaging in hazing. Of the athletes who experienced at least one hazing behaviour, 60.60% reported that coaches were not aware, present, or involved in the hazing behaviours, while 33.90% reported that coaches were aware of the behaviours but not present, 33.71% reported that coaches were present during the behaviour, and 4.54% reported that coaches were involved in the behaviour. Additionally, 67.40% reported that team alumni were not present during any hazing behaviours.

Perceptions of the Nature of Hazing

Participants who reported experiencing at least one hazing behaviour indicated that the behaviours primarily took place off-campus in a private residence (74.90%), off-campus in a public space (25.82%), and on-campus in an outdoor public space (16.41%). Athletes also reported that hazing behaviours occurred during the day (7.25%), during the evening (59.36%), and both during the day and the evening (33.39%). Hazing behaviours primarily occurred on a weekend free of competition (77.61%) as opposed to on a weekday (12.27%) or on a weekend or weekday in which the team was competing (10.12%). In terms of social media, photos of hazing behaviours were not generally posted on a public web space, as approximately 80% of athletes reported that they have never posted pictures of their team’s hazing activities online. When asked if others had ever posted pictures of hazing activities on a public web space, 55.46% of athletes responded no, 25.58% responded yes, and 19% were unsure.

Attitudes Toward Hazing

Participants reported speaking about their or others’ hazing experience to a friend (77.13%), another member of their team (67.09%), and a team captain (41.67%). In contrast, Alternatively, participants indicated that they did not speak to a clergy member (88.13%), a counselor (86.85%), or a coach/advisor (79.20%) about their hazing experience. As a result of participating in hazing behaviours, 63.02% of participants felt more belonged to the team and 18.65% felt a sense of accomplishment. A smaller portion of athletes experienced negative feelings as a result of participating in hazing, including looking forward to their chance to do it to others (19.92%), feeling stressed (10.84%), feeling humiliated/degraded (9.08%), and feeling guilty (7.97%).

Of the participants who had self-identified as having been hazed, the majority of athletes did not report the hazing behaviours to university authorities (88.14%). A large portion of athletes indicated they did not report hazing events because they felt that experiencing hazing was part of being a member of a team (75.67%). Other athletes did not report hazing events because they: (a) were fearful that other team members would find out they reported the event, (b) were worried about being harmed by their teammates if they find out they reported the event (12.58%). Athletes also indicated that they did not want to get their team members in trouble (27.42%).

Exposure to Hazing Prevention and Intervention Strategies

The majority of the sample indicated that their team had never been provided with a list of ideas for positive team building activities as an alternative to hazing (55%). Most athletes indicated that they were told of anti-hazing policies during new student orientation (60.46%), and prior to joining the team or organization (62.53%). A small percentage of participants reported attending hazing prevention workshops presented by adults and peers, 22.30% and 12.21%, respectively.

Discussion

The results revealed that over half of the athletes indicated that they as well as others on their team experienced at least one hazing behaviour. Over one third of athletes indicated that coaches were aware of hazing behaviours, while another one third of athletes reported that coaches were present during the behaviours. Results also indicated that hazing behaviours primarily occurred off-campus in a private residence, on weekends free of competition, and at night. The majority of athletes who were exposed to hazing reported experiencing more positive feelings rather than negative feelings. A large portion of athletes did not report hazing incidents to university authorities because athletes believed that being exposed to hazing was part of being a member of the team. Finally, the results showed that most athletes learned about hazing policies during new student orientation and prior to joining the team.

Findings of the current study illustrated that hazing is prevalent in Canadian university athletics, with 58% of athletes experiencing at least one hazing behaviour. Interestingly, however, this is the lowest rate of hazing noted in any research study examining hazing among university athletes. Similar to past research in the US (Allan & Madden, 2012) some of the most common types of hazing behaviours reported by athletes in the current study included public humiliation and degradation, suggesting that types of hazing behaviours remain relatively consistent across various student membership groups (e.g., athletes, academic clubs, performing arts). Further, when participants who reported experiencing hazing were asked whether they had ever been hazed, only 60% self-identified as being a victim of hazing. This particular finding underscores the confusion among athletes regarding what constitutes and defines hazing, and is a consistent phenomenon noted in other hazing research.

Approximately 34% of athletes in the current study indicated that coaches were aware of hazing behaviour, but were not present. This finding is comparable to past research which has shown that 25% of college students believed their coaches/advisors had knowledge of the hazing. More alarmingly was the finding that 34% of athletes indicated that coaches were present during hazing behaviours. Taken together, the perceptions athletes had regarding their coaches’ knowledge of and presence during hazing parallels past research showing that the majority of athletes reported that their coaches allowed and tolerated hazing and some athletes even indicated that their coaches encouraged hazing by telling athletes whom to haze. Interestingly, the findings from the current study, coupled with past research, provide some evidence that athletes’ perceptions of their coaches’ behaviours pertaining to hazing do not coincide with coaches’ overt attitudes toward hazing. To illustrate, Caperchione and Holman (2004) found that the majority of university coaches disapproved of hazing practices, and believed that athletes should challenge, reject, and even report hazing practices.

Coaches even went as far as stating that athletes who refuse to participate in hazing rituals and ceremonies should be respected and admired by their peers. This notion of newcomers challenging and rejecting hazing practices, and subsequently being respected and even admired for doing so is considerably inconsistent with both the literature and the findings of this study. Additionally, it is extremely discouraging that some coaches may feign ignorance of any knowledge or may be present during hazing behaviours given that such behaviours support hazing practices, reinforce team hierarchy, and indirectly (and potentially directly) harm the welfare of the newcomer. Therefore, given coaches can play a vital role in the hazing process, they should not only develop and communicate strict team policies against hazing, but also engage in behaviours that support these policies.

Results of the present study suggest that athletes’ perceptions of the nature of hazing appear to be somewhat different than those outlined in previous research. For example, in the current study athletes indicated that hazing primarily occurred off-campus in a private residence, during weekends free of competition, and at night. They also reported that photos of hazing behaviours were not generally posted on social media outlets. However, students in Allan and Madden’s (2012) US study reported that hazing often occurred in a public space on campus and during the day, and that photos of hazing behaviours were posted online by either themselves or others on their team/organization. The reason for these varying findings may be due to the difference in populations sampled in the current study (student-athletes) to that sampled in Allan and Madden’s study (e.g., student-athletes, members of performing arts group, members of academic clubs, etc.). Athletes of teams, unlike members of student organizations, may spend more time together (e.g., attending practices at night) and therefore may have more opportunity to engage in hazing practices. Additionally, research has shown that athletes (along with members of fraternities and sororities) are more susceptible to experiencing hazing than other group memberships (Allan & Madden, 2012). Consequently, there has been a growing interest among practitioners and researchers with respect to implementing more effective hazing prevention efforts and stronger disciplinary policies within university athletic programs. In the current study, it is possible that athletes took several precautionary measures to avoid “getting caught” (e.g., not posting photos online) and potentially receiving some form of punishment, thereby feeding into the secrecy culture of hazing.

Similar to past US research, the majority of athletes in the current study perceived significantly more positive outcomes of hazing than negative. This finding suggests that athletes may consider many of the hazing behaviours as harmless and appropriate, especially when their teammates approve and support such behaviours. For instance, if a newcomer participates in a hazing behaviour that appears seemingly innocent (e.g., wearing embarrassing clothes) and does not perceive this experience as harmful, then they may be more likely to perceive hazing as a positive experience. In fact, nearly two thirds of athletes in the present study reported that they felt more part of the team after participating in hazing behaviours. This perspective appears to be consistent with the well-established belief that acquiescing to hazing practices leads to full membership into the group. Athletes might have justified their willingness to be hazed as important because of the subsequent award (e.g., membership). Further, the results showed that the majority of athletes who participated in hazing did not report the behaviours to university authorities. The primary reason for not reporting hazing behaviours was athletes’ perception that experiencing hazing was part of being a team member. This finding illustrates the extent to which hazing is a deep-seated tradition, and mirrors earlier hazing research showing that engaging in hazing behaviours is considered to be a normal aspect of sport. Athletes in the current study also indicated that they did not report hazing incidents because they were fearful of the negative consequences (e.g., being harmed and being treated as an outsider). Similarly, current and former athletes from a US study indicated that they were unwilling to speak out against hazing as it would lead to greater humiliation and alienation from the team. Collectively, these findings reinforce the need to educate athletes on the dangers of hazing and empower athletes to stand up against hazing traditions. We suggest that case studies, scenarios, and role playing could be used to teach athletes how to prevent and intervene hazing incidents. Based on the present study’s findings, the prevention strategies recommendation would also be in concert with coaches and administrators to enhance effectiveness.

While the majority of athletes in the current study noted that they had been told of anti-hazing policies during new student orientation as well as prior to joining their team, only a small percentage indicated that they had participated in hazing prevention workshops. Additionally, findings revealed that most athletes had never been provided with ideas of alternative, positive initiation activities. These findings highlight the need to adopt more proactive approaches to hazing prevention efforts, such as conducting workshops and team discussions. More specifically, sport stakeholders (e.g., administrators and sport psychology consultants) could use workshops and team discussions as platforms to challenge, diminish, and replace hazing traditions. In collaboration with coaches, stakeholders could use workshops to educate athletes about hazing by identifying hazing as a problem, discussing the dangers of hazing, and explaining how they (the athletes) could play an important role in eliminating hazing initiations. Moreover, through team discussions, stakeholders could collaborate with athletes by brainstorming positive initiation activities (e.g., cooperative team games and excursions). Such positive initiation activities could serve as alternatives to traditional degrading, humiliating, and harmful hazing initiations, while at the same time foster group cohesion, a sense of social identity, and strong interpersonal relationships. In fact, results from this study found that the idea of implementing alternative orientations (e.g., rock climbing and canoe tripping) with male and female athletes could lead to numerous outcomes such as enhanced group cohesion, diminished team hierarchies, and improved group identity and be a replacement for current hazing practices.

Due to ethical reasons, coaches were responsible for forwarding their athletes the study’s invitation email. Thus, it is possible that some coaches consciously decided not to forward the email to their athletes as an effort to maintain the culture of silence around hazing. On a similar note, while over 1000 athletes agreed to participate in the current study, more than half did not complete the survey. Of course, numerous factors may have influenced this incompletion rate. Given the nature of the topic (hazing) it is possible that athletes felt uncomfortable detailing their involvement in hazing, despite the fact that anonymity and confidentiality were ensured.

(Please see the ppt for Stage two results)

 Policy implications

We recommend that our findings be used to make recommendations for an effective, proactive policy that supports the development of positive values among sport teams, including a clear process for investigating and prosecuting violations related to hazing with clear sanctions or consequences. Such a policy can then strengthen the voice of participants and contribute to change from within. The targeted groups should be governing bodies, U Sports, individual universities, high school sport, provincial regulating bodies across sport, and club sport organizations.

The findings can be used to promote the implementation of effective policies and training programs that address the dangers of hazing, augmenting the likelihood of athlete retention by creating a social and competitive setting where athletes want to spend their time and efforts and families want to encourage and support their achievements. The success of the project is dependent upon the shared outcomes of the study and the use of these findings in the development of recommendations and educational materials to be widely distributed.  Some of the specific initiatives to achieve this include: multiple press conferences to release findings; formal written reports with findings and recommendations for participant institutions and for general public (via paper and website); shared findings via presentations at national meetings or conferences, some of which might include U Sports Annual General meetings, Regional general meetings, Coaching Association of Canada, community sport organizations such as the OHL, North American Society for Sport Management and the North American Society for the Sociology of Sport.

A further recommendation is to develop and distribute workshop and educational materials based on findings and a curriculum that can be implemented by administrators (similar to mandated drug education for athletes) and educators in universities, to be modeled by other similar organizations such as secondary schools. The information generated may be sufficient for the co-researchers to develop book proposal(s) for an academic/research audience, or a general audience of community coaches, administrators and parents as well as generating articles for scholarly forums such as journals and newsletters.

Set up multi-media platforms, Facebook pages and twitter to educate and communicate with teams, coaches and athletes as well as the governing organizations to create a more transparent approach and conversation regarding hazing.

Next steps

Researchers might consider qualitatively examining perceptions of hazing among athletes, coaches, and athletic directors, with a particular focus on investigating existing and future hazing prevention strategies and interventions. This information could inform researchers and practitioners of the key ingredients needed in order to develop cost-effective, practical, and successful strategies and interventions. Investigating the coaching culture would also advance the literature on hazing in athletics. Additionally, researchers have noted that mentoring between current and new team members could serve as a positive socialization experience and could facilitate a positive, healthy team environment. In fact, recent research suggests that approximately 40% of Canadian intercollegiate athletes have never been peer-mentored by another athlete. The benefits of being peer-mentored by another athlete include increased satisfaction with teammates, as well as enhanced confidence and performance and a willingness to mentor other athletes. Coaches of teams notorious for upholding hazing traditions could attempt to facilitate an environment where veteran athletes are encouraged to mentor rookie athletes. This approach might help to reduce the prevalence of hazing in sport teams. Determining whether mentoring relationships between athletes would prevent hazing incidents warrants future investigation. This mentorship could also be extended to high school and club sport (feeder systems for university sport) to target high school athletes to educate and involve them in discussions and positive orientations to start cultural change prior to university and have more athletes stay in sport in general.

Research should also be conducted on the effectiveness of alternative interventions such as rock climbing and outdoor adventure based education to change the culture of hazing on teams.

Lastly, an important aspect of this phenomena that should be researched is the feeder system. Little is known what goes on with teams and athletes in Canada prior to arriving at University although US research indicated a high percentage of students experience hazing.

Key stakeholders and benefits

The Canadian Association for the Prevention of Discrimination and Harassment in Higher Education and sport organizations (e.g., U Sports, Sport Canada NSOs, Sport Manitoba, Canada West, Ontario Federation of School Athletic Associations, Coaching Association of Canada, community sport organizations such as the OHL, North American Society for Sport Management and the North American Society for the Sociology of Sport).

2017 Sport Canada Research Initiative Conference (Knowledge Transfer Summary)

Investigators: Jay Johnson, University Of Manitoba; M. Holman; J. Chin‐San; E. Allan; M. Madden

SCRI Conference presentation video.

When a high school age student athlete receives a concussion, it’s important that all adults that interact with that student know how to provide the best atmosphere for them when they return to school. While health care professionals are increasingly being made aware of how to recognize a concussion and the recommendations for care of a concussed patient, teachers, principals, guidance counselors and coaches need to be just as aware of how student-athletes’, both physically and academically are affected so they can ensure their health as well as educational growth.

A concussion is the most common sports injury an athlete can sustain. While most concussed athletes will only have mild symptoms and short-term effects, there are a few people that experience debilitating side-effects that can last weeks or months. Since there are no outward physical indications a person has suffered a concussion, school officials may fail to recognize when a student might require environmental or academic adjustments. Parachute Canada recommends parents and educators create a return-to-learn plan to provide an individualized learning plan for a concussed students. Below are some signs and possible solutions to consider when creating a return-to-learn plan:

School officials should also be aware that a student’s surroundings can also negatively affect them. Bright lights and loud noises from a school cafeteria or hallway as well as a music or shop class can be especially problematic. Watching videos, slide presentations or using computers may require minor adjustments due to potential light sensitivity, such as allowing the student to wear sunglasses or turning down a screen’s brightness.

Educators are in a unique position to be able to spot subtle changes in a returning student-athlete’s behaviour and have the ability to offer up assistance and adjustment of expectations when necessary. It’s recommended that student-athletes avoid participating in sports until they are able to attend school without extra accommodations. Awareness, flexibility, and an understanding of a concussed student’s needs are key elements to making the return-to-learn and eventual return-to-play as smooth as possible.

References from the SIRC Collection:

Broglio S, Macciocchi S, Ferrara M. Neurocognitive Performance of Concussed Athletes When Symptom Free. Journal Of Athletic Training (National Athletic Trainers’ Association). October 2007;42(4):504-508.

Gessel L, Fields S, Collins C, Dick R, Comstock R. Concussions Among United States High School and Collegiate Athletes. Journal Of Athletic Training (National Athletic Trainers’ Association). October 2007;42(4):495-503.

McGrath N. Supporting the Student-Athlete’s Return to the Classroom After a Sport-Related Concussion. Journal Of Athletic Training (National Athletic Trainers’ Association). September 2010;45(5):492-498.

Saunders E, Burdette G, Metzler J, Joyner A, Buckley T. Knowledge of Coaching Education Students Regarding Sport-Related Concussions. Athletic Training & Sports Health Care: The Journal For The Practicing Clinician. January 2013;5(1):11-19.

Schmies H. Putting Our Heads Together: Collaborating for Student Success after Concussion. JOPERD: The Journal Of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. October 2014;85(8):5-8.