Internationalizing Sport Management Programs: No Longer a Luxury, But a Necessity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sport participation, consumption, and management are internationally focused, and the popularity of sport on an international scale shows no signs of slowing down. In fact, there is evidence that the internationalization of sport is rapidly increasing. Most North American institutions of higher learning are similarly focused and have internationalization as a high strategic priority. One could argue that sport management academic programs have not kept pace with these developments that have influenced our field and environment. While progress has been made, there is more to be done. The author chronicles the developments in the internationalization of both sport and higher education and offers eight suggestions to help sport management academicians effectively and efficiently internationalize their programs. Implementing some or all of these suggestions may better prepare graduates in their future endeavors and more effectively align sport management programs with the goals of their respective institution. Internationalization of the discipline would hold useful and practical applications for sport management students and programs.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it