دانلود رایگان ترجمه مقاله نظریه و توسعه تئوری در مدیریت ورزشی – الزویر ۲۰۱۳
دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی نظریه و توسعه نظریه در مدیریت ورزش به همراه ترجمه فارسی
عنوان فارسی مقاله: | نظریه و توسعه نظریه در مدیریت ورزش |
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله: | Theory and theory development in sport management |
رشته های مرتبط: | تربیت بدنی، مدیریت ورزشی |
فرمت مقالات رایگان | مقالات انگلیسی و ترجمه های فارسی رایگان با فرمت PDF میباشند |
کیفیت ترجمه | کیفیت ترجمه این مقاله متوسط میباشد |
نشریه | الزویر – Elsevier |
کد محصول | f471 |
مقاله انگلیسی رایگان (PDF) |
دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی |
ترجمه فارسی رایگان (PDF) |
دانلود رایگان ترجمه مقاله |
خرید ترجمه با فرمت ورد |
خرید ترجمه مقاله با فرمت ورد |
جستجوی ترجمه مقالات | جستجوی ترجمه مقالات تربیت بدنی |
بخشی از ترجمه فارسی مقاله: ۱٫مقدمه |
بخشی از مقاله انگلیسی: ۱٫ Introduction Theory, or a statement of constructs and their relationships to one another that explain how, when, why, and under what conditions phenomena take place, is a critical element in the advancement of an academic discipline. In fact, Kerlinger and Lee (2000) argued that theory represents the fundamental aim of science. Analysis of Sport Management Review demonstrates that the journal has a long history of publishing work where authors offer a new theoretical framework or provide an integrative review of the literature. For instance, early works published in the ‘‘Conceptual Advance’’ section included a review of the organizational behavior literature (Doherty, 1998), a critical analysis of sport tourism (Gibson, 1998), the introduction of the Psychological Continuum Model (Funk & James, 2001), and an integrated model of work– family conflict (Dixon & Bruening, 2005)—some of the more widely cited articles in the sport management literature. More recently, authors have published works under the ‘‘Reviews’’ section, with a focus on a wide variety of topics, including masculinity (Anderson, 2009), physical activity interventions (Henderson, 2009), the unique features of sport (Smith & Stewart, 2010), organizational justice (Mahony, Hums, Andrew, & Dittmore, 2011), racial inequality (Cunningham, 2010), attitudes toward sponsorships (Chen & Zhang, 2011), institutional theory (Washington & Patterson, 2011), gambling in sport (Lamont, Hing, & Gainsbury, 2011), and sport for development (Lyras & Welty Peachey, 2011). These articles serve to integrate the literature and coalesce what would otherwise seem to be divergent views surrounding a topic. They also provide theoretical integrations and unique ways of approaching critical topics in the field. A review of this scholarship, and the broader sport management literature in general, shows that one topic has been curiously omitted: theory and theory development. Of course, this is not to suggest that theory is absent from this scholarship; in fact, analysis of the articles published in the ‘‘Conceptual Advance’’ and ‘‘Reviews’’ sections points to a strong focus on theory. What is missing, though, is a treatment of theory in general. Is it important to sport management scholarship, and if so, why? Whatis the process oftheory development? The purpose ofthis scholarly exchange is to flesh out some of these issues in greater depth. Specifically the contributors to this collection reflect on the role of theory and theory development in sport management academia. Coming from different research niches and backgrounds (i.e., leadership, human resource management, consumer behavior, and sponsorship), the contributors also understandably offer unique perspectives concerning the topic. In the following space, I introduce the articles included in this exchange, highlighting their unique contributions. ۲٫ Overview Five scholars contributed to this collection of papers. Doherty (2013) offers an overview of how she conceptualizes theory and draws from her previous work to provide illustrative examples. She then convincingly argues that sport management scholars should ‘‘invest in theory’’ by using it to undergird research, practice, and teaching. In the second article, Irwin and Ryan (2013) focus on ties with industry and suggest researchers can generate theory by engaging in authentic, collaborative interactions with persons working in the field. They further articulate several benefits of engaging in what they term ‘‘authentic research and learning environments,’’ including better student learning and faculty instruction, improved industry relationships, and enhanced scholarship. In the third contribution, Fink (2013) also provides an overview of how she conceptualizes theory and then focuses on the process in which she engages when theorizing. Importantly, Fink emphasizes the need for sport-focused theory, a point Chalip (2006) has also made, and the potential constraints to developing theory. Finally, Chelladurai (2013), one of the most accomplished theoreticians in sport management, offers a personal account of his experience in theory development. In doing so, he highlights the processes in which he has engaged to develop theories related to athletic teams as coalitions, the sport management discipline, organizational effectiveness, and leadership. |