Co-Branding Through an International Double Degree Program: A Single Case Study in Sport Management Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scholars forecast that globalization will require sport managers to have competencies in international business. Sport, due to its global nature, has become an international business, leading to sport management programs at postsecondary institutions growing in number and the marketing of such programs becoming a key success factor. In an increasingly competitive educational environment, both effective curriculum offerings and innovative marketing, including branding, are important for a successful sport management program. This article shares a case study of innovative marketing—the co-branding through a double degree program between two long-standing sport management programs, one in North America (Ohio University, United States) and one in Europe (University of Bayreuth, Germany). This program is designed to enhance international education, as well as global internship and job-placement opportunities. The details of the double degree program within the background of co-branding are presented as a pedagogical framework for international education. Data from a survey of industry professionals are analyzed to demonstrate the need for such an international double degree program. Results provide a template for replication by other institutions and identify potential future research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".