1. Accreditation status of your academic unit/sport management program:
   Accredited
   
   
2. Identify any significant changes that have taken place in your sport management degree programs during the reporting period. Indicate the impact of any of these changes, if applicable, in a written statement of explanation.
   1. Did you terminate any degree programs during the reporting year?
      No
      
      
   2. Were changes (e.g., curricular) made in any of your sport management majors, concentrations or emphases?
      Yes 
      
      
   3. Were any new sport management degree programs established during the reporting year (includes Esports management, Associate's degree)?
      No
      
      
   4. Was approval of your regional or national accrediting body required for any of these programs?
      No
   
   
3. Identify any administrative and other changes that directly affect your academic unit/sport management program and attach an updated organizational chart that shows these relationships. Such changes would include: 
   • Your sport management unit's primary representative to COSMA
   • your institution's President, Academic Vice President, Dean, Provost, etc.
   • The head of your academic unit/sport management program (if different from the primary representative to the COSMA).
   • Faculty changes
     Position: Provost
     Name: Michael Stephenson
     Title: Dr. 
     Email: provost@ut.edu
     
     
     Position: Dean
     Name: Brian Knuckley
     Title: Dr. 
     Email: bknuckley@ut.edu
     
     What impact have these changes had on your program? Comment specifically about faculty changes (faculty leaving, new faculty, other forms of faculty turnover). If you have a new COSMA accreditation primary representative: What are you doing to maintain continuity with the accreditation process? Provide a narrative response to these questions.
     
     We have hired one additional full time faculty member who will begin in the Fall of 2026 who will focus primarily on teaching our Sales courses.
     
     Dr. Michael Stephenson started as provost during the 25-26 academic year, Dr. Brian Knuckley will serve as the new Dean of the College of Natural and Health Sciences in the 26-27 school year.
   
   Other Changes/Issues
   
   
4. Briefly comment on other changes or issues pertaining to your academic unit/sport management program (e.g., new partnerships, innovations, campus locations, change in program delivery, etc). Describe any modifications made to your program delivery, collection of outcomes assessment data and grading/graduation requirements, if applicable. Provide supporting documentation, as needed. Failure to report changes may result in administrative probation. 
   
   The Sport Management program underwent the process of having the SPM 491 Senior Seminar course count as the Culminating Experience requirement for the Spartan Studies general education requirement. This change includes a 1 unit addition to the program and will initiate in the Fall of 2026. 

1. Has your outcomes assessment plan changed from initial approval or since last year's Annual Report?
   Yes
   
   
2. Complete the following chart if you are responding to feedback from the Board of Commissioners as follows: 
   • Notes and Observations in a recent accreditation granted letter
   • Required response items to a Candidacy Status granted letter
   • Action Items from a Site Visit report
   • Required response items to an accreditation deferred letter
     
   
   
   
3. Provide the URL(s) for the page on your sport management academic unit's home page that makes available to the public the following:
   
   This information must be updated annually. Failure to comply with this request will result in Administrative Probation 
   
   
4. Complete the following program-level student learning outcomes (SLO) matrix and program-level operational effectiveness goals (OEG) matrix.

Student Learning Outcomes Matrix Academic Year 2025-2026

University of Tampa, Department of Sport Management Mission Statement: The University of Tampa Department of Sport Management’s mission is to prepare undergraduate students for a career in sport business by developing relationships and skills both inside and outside the classroom through engaging, innovative and inclusive learning environments.

Not Reported in the 2025-2026 cycle

SLO 1 - Use the Commission on Sport Management Accreditation's Common Professional Component to solve problems.

SLO 3: Write for a sport industry audience. 

SLO 5: Evaluate ethical issues relevant to the sport industry.

SLO 6: Prepare for a career in the sport industry.

Summary of Student Learning Outcomes Assessment: Talk about your data. Which data are most important to your program? Which SLO benchmarks were exceeded, met or not met? Why or why not?

SLO 2: SLO 2’s goal was not met this year. The 2025-2026 academic year resulted in a curricular change that impacted the longitudinal reporting. The artifact for this changed from a book report presentation on the Savannah Bananas to an individual presentation on a lesser known area of sport management. Students generally scored higher on the new artifact utilizing the same assessment rubric. However, few students earned a 3/4 on all areas. This may be due to the way in which the prompts for this assignment were delivered as the assignment served as a single year stopgap as the program transitions the SPM 491 Senior Seminar course into a 4 unit course that meets the university designated requirements for the general education culminating experience requirements at UTampa.

SLO 4: SLO 4’s goal was not met this year. Students scored particularly highly on the organization portion of the rubric across all three semesters measured. This is not surprising as the expectation for the organization of the presentation was made clear via example. Similarly, they tend to score high on the supporting materials as they had the opportunity to review what was submitted beforehand. Students did not do a “practice” presentation and this left them with lower scores in the language and delivery areas of the rubric. One note of interest was the difference in the central message scores between the semesters. In the smaller class size during the Fall 2025 semester this was met by 100% of students. This may indicate that smaller class sizes allow for more clear instruction on expectations related to these assignments. They also resulted in smaller groups. 

Action Plan: What are you going to do based on the results of this data? You might describe adjusting curriculum, introduction of concepts, focusing on skills, raising (or lowering) benchmarks, waiting and seeing, talking with stakeholders about the results, meeting with internal partners about the results, hiring faculty, etc. Also indicate how any changes you are proposing are integrated into various levels of strategic planning and budgeting.

The revised SPM 491 course and corresponding projects will have greater detail in the assignments that more closely align to the language of the rubrics utilized for SLOs 2 and 4. Students will also have a greater number of opportunities to practice pitching content presentations in this course ahead of their summative assessments. The redesigning of this course should create artifacts that are more closely aligned with the rubrics being utilized, so the department plans to keep the targets the same. Additionally, a new course enrollment cap has been set for this course which will hopefully result in smaller group sizes for presentations. 

Program-Level Operational Effectiveness Goals Matrix Academic Year 2024-25

Not evaluated during the 2025-2026 cycle

OEG 1 – Create and maintain partnerships with sport organizations.

OEG 4 – Develop Spartan Ready skills among all sport management majors and minors.

OEG 5 – Create and sustain a culture within the department that promotes the wellbeing, professional development, and collective success of all members.

Summary of Operational Effectiveness Goals: Talk about your data.

Which data are most important to your program? Which OEG benchmarks were exceeded, met or not met? Why or why not?

The faculty decided to wait until the Spring 2026 semester to discuss updating the curriculum map because little change was made in the aftermath of the COSMA site visit the preceding academic year. A curriculum mapping exercise took place as did a discussion of appropriate goals/targets and language for SLOs and OEGs. Both the CPC and Professional Development continuum have been addressed and updated. Further discussion around this is planned for the fall 2026 meeting.

Not all faculty attended two professional development workshops on campus this year, nor did every faculty receive a peer teaching evaluation. This remains a work in progress.

Action Plan: What are you going to do based on the results of this data? You might describe new/improved interventions to increase graduation rates, new methods to retain students, increasing faculty development training to improve teaching, implementing different social media platforms to stay in touch with alumni, etc. Also indicate how any changes you are proposing are integrated into various levels of strategic planning and budgeting.

Discussion on defining the intention behind conference attendance, workshop attendance etc. was had at the Spring 2026 meeting. Further investigation into potentially rephrasing these items so all faculty more clearly understand why the goals are articulated is planned for the Fall 2026 meeting. Additionally, there may be a need to change targets from all to a percentage of faculty as the fulltime faculty grow larger and compliance with these stated goals is not mandatory.