Historians of 19Th Century Baseball: Exploring Their

Home , Cory Wade, Doubleday myth, Henry Chadwick (writer), John Thorn, Origins of baseball

HISTORIANS OF 19TH CENTURY BASEBALL: EXPLORING THEIR

EXPERIENCES REGARDING THEIR AVOCATION

Wade Berstler

A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of

The College of Education

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Florida Atlantic University

Boca Raton, Florida

August 2016

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to take this time to acknowledge the people who contributed so much of themselves to make sure this dissertation process came to successful fruition. My deepest heartfelt thanks must go to the person who has mentored me from the interview for acceptance into the doctoral program, to holding my hand as I navigated through the

Educational Leadership curriculum, which was uncharted territory for this American

History master’s graduate. She has seen me at my worst, while still believing my best is yet to come. She never wavered in my resolve of the academic worthiness of the subject matter I have chosen to pursue. She has nudged, coddled, nurtured, kicked-in-the-pants, all when necessary—and sometimes all at once—throughout this difficult process. It will be my great honor and pleasure to be hooded by my professor, academic advisor, committee chair, and most importantly, my friend, Dr. Valerie Bryan.

My undying gratitude and appreciation to the rest of my dissertation committee members: Dr. Eliah Watlington, Dr. Ralph G. Brockett, and Dr. Stephen D. Engle.

Thank you for your time, infinite patience, expertise, and invaluable contributions to this endeavor. I am grateful that you have seen fit to travel this long, and often times bumpy, journey, for and with me.

I would also like to extend my sincerest gratitude to my Society for American

Baseball research friends at the Frederick Ivor-Campbell Conference on 19th Century

Baseball History. For the past five years, each have made meaningful contributions to the research without complaint. The support and congeniality made the data gathering

process bearable. I am indebted to them. However, special thanks to these six interview participants: Richard Hershberger, Joanne Hulbert, Joe Mancuso, Eric Miklich Tom

Shieber, and Bob Tholkes. I cannot thank them enough for their valuable time, insight, and candor. I am humbled to be part of such a fine group of individuals. In addition, this study would not have been possible without the help and cooperation of Jim Gates and the staff of the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum.

The emotional and mental nadir of this laborious academic journey certainly took its toll, but without the encouragement of the faculty and staff of the Florida Atlantic

University-Davie campus, my education may have come to a premature end. The following mentors and colleagues held me up and pushed me forward regardless of obstacles. A special profound thanks to Laura Snellgrove-Cushing, Dr. Rivka Felsher,

Stephanie McDaniel, Dr. Kristin Brittain, Dr. Liz Swann, Dr. Ann Musgrove, and the late

Dr. Fran Kamin for the encouragement and compassion.

The same may be said for a small circle of friends outside academia who believed in me when I doubted myself. I cannot thank Paul Baker, Sheldon Birman, Jason

Jenkins, Jay Korngold, Art Petinsky, and Walter Bussell enough.

Cliché aside, last but certainly not least, I would like to thank my wife, Helen

Berstler, and my son, Cory Wade Berstler. Helen worked two jobs for quite a substantial portion of my educational sojourn. She believed I had “it” in me when I thought I was in over my head. Even when illness befell her, her support never wavered. Cory has taught me so much about being a good father, a good student, and a good man. My desire for them to be as proud of me as I am of them provided the inspiration necessary to

persevere. Without their love providing the bedrock, this dissertation would have never been possible. I can never pay back what Helen and Cory have given so freely to me.

vi ABSTRACT

Author: Wade Berstler

Title: Historians of 19th Baseball: Exploring Their Experiences Regarding Their Avocation

Institution: Florida Atlantic University

Dissertation Advisor: Dr. Valerie Bryan

Degree: Doctor of Philosophy

Year: 2016

The following document offers a qualitative case study in the field of adult and community education from an educational leadership perspective using baseball as an adult learning tool. Relevant existing theories (adult education, lifelong learning, adult learners, and certain leadership practices) for successful facilitation of historical baseball research were examined. The study focused on a purposeful sample population upon which a pilot study was conducted, revealing the experiences of adult self-directed learners who produce the seminal work in their field as an avocation. The findings of this study included, but are not limited to, the passionate approach the study group members have for their subject matter, their love of learning, and the self-directedness of non- formally trained research historians using baseball as an adult learning tool. The findings also revealed the group members belief in the academic worthiness of baseball history, and their willingness to share their work with others to advance the field.

vii HISTORIANS OF 19TH CENTURY BASEBALL: EXPLORING THEIR

EXPERIENCES REGARDING THEIR AVOCATION

List of Tables ...... xii

List of Figures ...... xiii

I. Introduction ...... 1

Rationale ...... 6

Purpose of the Study ...... 7

Research Questions ...... 7

Significance ...... 7

Definition of Terms ...... 9

Limitations and Delimitations ...... 11

Summary ...... 12

Organization of the Study ...... 13

II. Literature Review ...... 14

Theoretical Framework ...... 15

Adult Learning, Lifelong Learning, and Self-directed Learning ...... 16

Adult Learning ...... 16

Lifelong Learning ...... 17

Self-directed Learning ...... 20

Leadership ...... 21

Leadership Characteristics ...... 21

viii Transformational Leadership ...... 25

Baseball History Literature ...... 26

Historical Relevance of Baseball Research ...... 27

Baseball Statistics ...... 28

Social Mobility and Baseball ...... 30

Labor and Baseball ...... 33

Baseball and Industry ...... 35

III. Design of the Study ...... 37

Research Sample ...... 39

Study Site ...... 39

Research Setting ...... 42

Research Questions ...... 42

Participant Recruitment ...... 43

Instrumentation ...... 44

Data Collection Plan ...... 44

Data Analysis Plan and Coding ...... 46

Validity and Reliability ...... 49

Chapter Summary ...... 52

IV. Data Collection and Analysis ...... 53

Group Participants ...... 55

Richard Hershberger ...... 56

Robert (Bob) Tholkes ...... 57

Joe Mancuso ...... 57

Joanne Hulbert ...... 58

Tom Shieber ...... 59

Eric Miklich ...... 61

Data Collection ...... 62

Overview of Findings ...... 65

Self-directed Learning ...... 74

Relevance ...... 78

Adult Learners ...... 81

Academic Worthiness of Baseball History ...... 83

Demographics ...... 88

V. Discussion, Conclusions, Recommendations ...... 95

Findings ...... 95

Conclusions ...... 97

Recommendations ...... 100

Significance ...... 101

Summary ...... 103

Appendices ...... 106

Appendix A. FAU IRB Approval Letter ...... 107

Appendix B. FAU IRB Approved Adult Consent Form...... 109

Appendix C. Interview Protocol ...... 110

Appendix D. List of Documents Reviewed ...... 112

Appendix E. Tom Shieber (2013) Conference Keynote Address: Annotating

Our Way Into the Future of Baseball Research ...... 115

Appendix F. Research Questions ...... 123

References ...... 124

xi TABLES

Table 1. Universities with Doctoral Degrees in Sports History ...... 1

Table 2. Select Studies of Leadership Traits and Characteristics in Chronological

Order ...... 22

Table 3. Major League Baseball Player Country of Origin Outside of the United

States (Palmer & Gillette, 2016) ...... 31

Table 4. Observation Protocol ...... 50

Table 5. Learning Characteristic Identifiers Obtained from Interviews ...... 64

Table 6. Participant Demographics ...... 89

Table 7. Summary of Study Findings, Interpretations, and Conclusions ...... 92

xii FIGURES

Figure 1. The Conceptual Framework of This Study as it is Derived From

the Literature ...... 14

Figure 2. The Theoretical Framework of This Study ...... 16

Figure 3. Overlapping Characteristics of Adult, Self-directed Learners ...... 82

xiii

I. INTRODUCTION

Over the last century, the field of history has seen new areas of study take on legitimacy. First was the study of African-American History, followed by Women’s

Studies. Arguably, the next area could very well be Sports History. Already, 14 universities around the country offer doctoral degrees with specializations in sports history (see Table 1).

Table 1

Universities with Doctoral Degrees in Sports History

Harvard University San Francisco State University of Nebraska University

Ohio State University Stanford University University of Northern Illinois

The Pennsylvania State Texas Tech University University of Texas University

Sports are as much part of the fabric of American culture as is music or art. But, where does one look for scholarship concerning the history of specific sports histories? General subject matter may be found anywhere. Any standard survey course in American History will make reference to the appearance of Jackie Robinson in a major league game, or an even earlier acknowledgement to President Andrew Jackson and his love for horseracing.

However, one particular sport has grown as America itself has grown. Its boon accompanied America’s Industrial Revolution; baseball, as Walt Whitman stated,

“America’s Game” (as cited in Bradley, 1953, p. 508). 1

No other major sport in the United States draws the same level of scrutiny as baseball. Basketball, also invented in the 19th century; nor football, itself a product of the same period, based on geographic demography, books published on the subject, and historical research organizations devoted to the sport (see Figure 1), come under the same consideration. Baseball, in its effort to serve its fans, became a representation of all things American when leisure activity became culturally relevant. Baseball is the only sport where the preservation of historical accuracy and its role in society is paramount, as exemplified by the scholarship-worthy research organizations it has spawned (Thompson

& Hufford, 2013). But, it wasn’t always that way. Myths and legends were woven into the sport to embrace the patriotic connection to baseball, and for America to further remove itself from British influence.

Until rather recently, it was up to sports journalists to be the “keepers of the flame” (Major League Baseball, 2011, para. 6) of baseball history. In 1971, the Society for American Baseball Research (SABR) was formed (Thompson & Hufford, 2013).

Currently, membership amounts to nearly 7,000 members worldwide. It is these individuals who work tirelessly, most without any significant compensation, to ensure that all pertinent historical subject matter is thoroughly researched and verified. This is what the original 16 members intended when they formed SABR. They defined the following five objectives:

1. To foster the study of baseball as a significant American social and athletic

institution.

2. To establish an accurate account of baseball through the years.

3. To facilitate the dissemination of baseball research information.

4. To stimulate the best interests of baseball as our national pastime.

5. To cooperate in safeguarding the proprietary interests of individual research

efforts of members of the Society. (Thompson & Hufford, 2013, p. 2)

The original formal mission statement supports these early objectives. The mission statement stated that, “the original mission was to foster the study of baseball, establish an accurate historical record, and to facilitate baseball research and the dissemination of that research primarily through our publications” (Thompson &

Hufford, 2013, p. 22). The information documented, used, and referenced by academics on the sport of baseball in the United States, is the work of members of SABR.

SABR is the primary source for academic historical accuracy concerning the subject of baseball. The original purpose of SABR was to bring together baseball historians, statisticians, and researchers. SABR is now a worldwide community of people who love to read about, talk about, and write about baseball. The vast majority of scholars of 19th century baseball are employed in a variety of fields having little or nothing to do with the business of baseball or its history. However, this group of dedicated researchers produces the seminal work cited by academic sport historians. This qualitative case study explored and described the experiences of the 50-member group that attended the 2015 Frederick Ivor-Campbell Conference on 19th Century Baseball

History. Their experiences, background, and learning style give insight as to why 19th century baseball history is their avocation.

Lifelong learning has been espoused since the days of Socrates and Confucius.

For the individuals attending the Frederick Ivor-Campbell Conference on 19th Century

Baseball History, the sheer desire to learn more seems to be the driving force behind their self-directed learning (Knowles, 1980) regarding baseball.

The first post-1900 concept concerning lifelong education was championed by

Eduard Lindeman in 1926 and reinforced by Basil Yeaxlee in 1929. More recently, lifelong education was “promoted chiefly by UNESCO in the 1960s and 1970s”

(Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2007, p. 47). However, self-directed learning did not come to the forefront of educational theory until the 1970s (Knowles, 1975).

Building upon Knowles’ concept of andragogy as “the art and science of helping adults learn” (Knowles, 1980, p. 43), Merriam and Brockett (1997) defined self-directed learning as, “adults assuming control of their learning” (p. 137). While there have been several cases of singular adult, self-directed learners, there is limited research examining entire groups of self-directed learners; much less lifelong, self-directed learners outside of their primary field of endeavor.

Notable self-directed learners, George Washington Carver and Marie Curie, have commanded some academic scrutiny in the context of the bias that they encountered, but they remained undeterred in their learning processes (Guglielmino, 2008). Alcatraz death row prisoner, Robert Stroud, produced groundbreaking research in the avian field.

Malcolm X Shabazz, like Stroud, experienced incarceration motivation, and embarked on the journey of self-improvement and self-discovery. Stroud’s and Shabazz’ findings influenced and empowered a generation of African-Americans. These individuals have warranted some academic examination.

Vocationally-oriented groups have been examined in the context of self-directed learning (Clardy, 2000; Delahaye & Ehrich, 2008); however, limited research exists that

specifically examines an entire group who are adult, self-directed learners and lifelong learners outside of their primary career activity (Brockett & Hiemstra, 1991). The

Society for American Baseball Research members, who are 19th century baseball historians, are just such a group. Not only are they adult, self-directed, lifelong learners, but they also produce the seminal academic research in the field of 19th century baseball history. This is the primary rationale for conducting this study with this particular population. The perspectives and insights of these individuals contribute to both the self- directed learning and lifelong learning bodies of knowledge that currently exists. In an effort to determine why a specific group of baseball historians study the 19th century history of the game, it would prove beneficial to find the parallels between aspects that are studied and theorized about today that were relevant even then. What motivates this group of individuals was the central focus of this dissertation.

What makes this group unique, as well as the dissertation study, is the research uncovered and subsequent journal articles produced by the members of the said group as the seminal work in the field of baseball history. Noted author and screenwriter, Michael

Lewis (2004), cited several SABR members in his work, Moneyball. These members include Bill James, the former security guard at the Stokely Van Camp pork and beans factory, and Jules Tygiel, the late University of San Francisco professor Pete Palmer was also cited by Lewis. Palmer was a former radar systems engineer for Raytheon (P.

Palmer, personal communication, May 17, 2014). In compiling his epic documentary work on the history of baseball, historian Ken Burns credits 12 SABR members as creative consultants (Ward & Burns, 1994). Many other SABR members are credited in other capacities as well. At various universities across the United States where sports

history is part of the departmental curriculum, the Society for American Baseball

Research member’s work is cited by scholars when the subject matter being examined is baseball. What makes the 19th century baseball historians a group worthy of study as preliminary research has shown that the vast majority engages in this scholarly work as an avocation, receiving little or no financial compensation. Reward for their work comes in the form of intellectual remuneration.

Rationale

This section is normally reserved to address the statement of the problem that exists to serve as the reason or reasons behind the study that follows. An observational pilot study was conducted through an IRB-approved course. The pilot study did not uncover any such “problem;” however, based on established adult learning, self-directed learning, and educational leadership theories, the pilot study did suggest opportunities to determine what motivated this group of lifelong learners to study such a unique topic.

Observations were made that supported some existing views, as well as revealed new insights that justified further research with this group, specifically regarding their area of research.

While the group may be unique, the motivations are not when it comes to why adults learn or the importance placed by adults on continuing education. Scholarship abounds in all areas previously mentioned, yet very little research exists that examines a particular group who produce the seminal work in a field as an avocation. Therein would lay the problem that provides the rationale for this study—to fill the void in the scholarly literature.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore and describe the experiences of a group of adult learners who produce the seminal work in the field of

19th century baseball history as an avocation.

Research Questions

The primary research question of this study was: What are the experiences of historians of 19th century baseball who produce the seminal work in the field as an avocation? However, other sub-questions are explored among the Society for American

Baseball Research (SABR) members that to help yield maximum insight. These include:

1. Do the selected members of the SABR group exhibit traits and characteristics that

can be considered those of self-directed learners based on the Self-Directed

Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) criteria (Guglielmino, 1977)?

2. What established theorized characteristics of adult learners are shared by this

particular group?

3. What leadership characteristics are identifiable among the selected members of

SABR?

Significance

As suggested by Kauffman (2002), new contributions to the fields of self-directed and lifelong learning were gathered as to the study habits and motivations of the adult learner by studying this unique group of individuals. The study provides additional demographic support to previous theories surrounding established characteristics of the adult learner (Dickie & Jay, 2009; Merriam, 2001). This study sheds new light on how adults learn and why they find the need to be not only lifelong learners, but lifelong

learners who make significant contributions to a given field (Guglielmino, 2008; Wolf,

1986).

Baseball as an adult learning tool has not been broached previously in the field of adult, self-directed learning. This study meets the challenge put forth by Brockett et al.

(2000), “to take the study of self-direction to a new level” (p. 543). This study seeks to provide evidence that will lead to other studies on seminal research is produced as an avocation. Perspectives of the adult self-directed learners also requires previous data to be re-examined due to the findings of this study. What constitutes, as well as motivates, the lifelong learner finds additional support from the research conducted here (Truluck &

Courtenay, 2010). Lastly, this study is unique in qualitative research, where the possibility exists that the findings could be transferred to a larger population due to the sheer number of baseball historians (nearly 7,000 SABR members).

Groundbreaking research is, by definition, significant. This study is groundbreaking on several levels. First, this study used baseball specifically as an adult learning tool in an academic context. Rarely in the field of educational leadership has any sport been examined for academic worthiness, much less the sub-fields of self- directed learning and adult learning. It is uncommon for research to be done on a group who contribute to the seminal work in a field as an avocation. The findings unique to this group of baseball historians, and specifically these participants, yields new understandings through the open-mindedness and flexibility of exploring new knowledge and form new opinions through research not usually conducted in adult education

(Delahaye & Erlich, 2008).

In addition, the leadership aspect concerning collaboration among learners who produce seminal research without the need for recognition is a unique concept, not to mention a unique group mentality. The study, as expressed by Dr. John Hardman

(personal communication, February 7, 2013), “Illuminate[s] values of the human condition previously unexplored.” Lastly, to some degree, sports—baseball in particular

—will realize academic credibility that has long been ignored despite being such an important aspect of American culture and societal values because of this study.

Therefore, this study contributes to SABR’s mission and provides additional credibility to the work produced by its members.

Definition of Terms

Adult Learners: For the purpose of this study, all non-traditional adults (over the age of

23 years) who learn in formal, non-formal, or informal learning environments.

Baseball Fan: For the purpose of this study, a baseball fan is one who follows and/or

enjoys any or all aspects of the game of baseball regardless of the era.

Clarification of areas and level of interest of the participants and the group for this

study will be determined through the collection of descriptive statistics.

Lifelong Learning: For the purpose of this study, lifelong learning is the facility or use of

formal, non-formal, and informal learning opportunities throughout one’s lives in

order to nurture the continuous development and improvement of the knowledge

and skills needed for employment and/or personal fulfillment.

Motivation: The act or process of giving someone a reason for doing something.

Participant Observer, Participant as Observer, Observer as a Participant, and Complete

Observer: For the purpose of this study, it was essential to identify the specific role of the

researcher. The researcher was studying the activities of the SABR group of 9

subjects, he was participating in their conference activities, and he was a member

of SABR. Participant Observer/Participant as Observer researcher is a

member of the group being studied, where the group is aware of the research

activity. In this regard, Raymond Gold, in 1958, felt that the researcher as

participant in the group had the following advantages and disadvantages:

…participant in the group who is observing others and who is interested

more in observing than in participating, as his/her participation is a given,

since he/she is a member of the group. This role also has disadvantages,

in that there is a trade-off between the depth of the data revealed to the

researcher and the level of confidentiality provided to the group for the

information they provide (as cited in Kawulich, 2005, p. 11).

The Observer as Participant role also lets the researcher be in the group and

participate as desired. His/her role is to collect data where the group is aware of

the research activities, but the group controls how much information is shared and

what activities the observer as participant is allowed in. The researcher in this

situation is not a member of the group.

The Complete Observer role is one of stealth. “The researcher is neither seen nor

noticed by the people under study” (Creswell, 2007, p. 167). The researcher

made every effort possible to serve in the observer role in this study due to the

study group being aware of the researcher’s presence and his reasons for being in

attendance.

Self-Directed Learning: For the purpose of this study, self-directed learning is adults

assuming control of their learning (Brockett & Hiemstra, 1991) with regard to

several principal areas of self-direction: personal autonomy, readiness, and an

ability to succeed in the individual’s general learning activities, and learner-

control of instruction (Candy, 1991).

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR): SABR is a community of people who

love to read about, talk about, and write about baseball and its history. The

organization has been formally in existence since 1971 (Thompson & Hufford

2013).

Limitations and Delimitations

Limitations may be encountered because as a member of the SABR group, researcher bias does exist due to previous observations by the researcher. Every effort was made to objectively analyze the data gathered. As a participant as observer

(participant role), a clearer understanding of the group and how these observations are conveyed is presented. Observations made as a participant as observer while attending past conferences has helped in providing a thick and rich description of all of the aspects of the environment where the study takes place. As noted by Creswell (2013):

The researcher is participating in the activity at the site. The participant role is

more salient than the researcher role. This may help the researcher gain insider

views and subjective data. However, it may be distracting for the researcher to

record data when he or she is integrated in the activity. (pp. 166-167)

Another bias is one of race. Since the interviewees are only group members who have attended the past five Frederick Ivor-Campbell Conferences on 19th Century

Baseball History, all of the interviewees are Caucasian. Observational data of those of other racial groups will be included if they are available.

There is also the issue of personal bias. The author is friends with many of the study subjects based on his relationship through SABR membership and having attended the prior four conferences with many of the same individuals. Additionally, the author has been affiliated in various roles within the institution of baseball as either a player, coach, umpire, and scribe. In the interest of this study, the author has maintained focus on the adult learning, self-directed learning, and leadership aspects of the study group and interview participants. However, it is difficult to maintain the status of passive observer as researcher when the author shares many of the characteristics of the study group and interview participants. These characteristics include, but are not limited to, passion for the subject matter, interest in group membership, and a love for history.

Delimitations have been set concerning the number of participants of the group to be interviewed. As advised by the researcher’s committee chairperson, five is the number of interviews to give accurate and reliable data and legitimacy. In addition, a delimitation has been set based on where the data was collected; the Frederick Ivor-

Campbell Conference on 19th Century Baseball History held annually at the National

Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, New York.

Summary

The preceding chapter has introduced the research study, Historians of 19th century baseball history: Exploring their experiences regarding their avocation, the rationale for the study, and the framework in which the study was conducted and assessed. In addition, the importance of the study regarding a specific group of adult learners and their experiences to produce the seminal work in their field as an avocation

was discussed. The author also posed the research questions, the limitations and delimitations of the study, as well as the study’s significance.

Organization of the Study

The dissertation is organized into five chapters. Chapter 1 contains the introduction, background, purpose and rationale, significance of the study, research questions, and limitations and delimitations. A review of selected literature pertaining to the study is presented in Chapter 2. The methodology and design of the study is described in Chapter 3. Data collection and analysis are included in Chapter 4. Chapter

5 contains the discussion, conclusions, and recommendations.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore and describe the experiences of a group of adult learners who produce the seminal work in the field of

19th century baseball history as an avocation.

To accurately assess the experiences revealed, one would have to consider the motivations of adult learners, lifelong learners, and self-directed learners. Due to the uniqueness of this study, in addition to a review of selected literature as it relates to the research questions concerning adult learners, lifelong learners, and self-directed learners, this chapter also includes selected literature pertaining to baseball history, as well as literature concerning leadership characteristics that the group in the study and its members exemplify.

Baseball History

Work/Avocation, Interest, Area of study

Adult Education Literature Adult Learners, Self- Directed Learners, Lifelong Learners

Traits, Characteristics, Leadership Types

Figure 1. The conceptual framework of this study as it is derived from the literature.

Theoretical Framework

The basic tenets of adult education consisting of continuing education and lifelong learning as espoused by Merriam et al. (2007), then incorporating Malcolm

Knowles’ theories on self-directed learning (1975) and the adult learner (Knowles,

Holton, & Swanson, 1998), serve as the foundation of this study that ultimately supports an altered version of Abraham Maslow’s (1943) Hierarchy of Needs theory. Other theories make many contributions to both perspectives of self-directed learning and adult education. What follows is a compilation of the many contributors to the field of adult and self-directed learning. No one theory stands alone or is absolute; yet, when the sum of the contributions to these fields is assembled and examined, what results reinforces

Maslow’s theory in the altered version presented here (see Figure 2).

Understanding how and why adults learn, and the subject matter in which they show interest, is essential to leading these adults by facilitation through a collective learning experience. For the purposes of this literature review, a semi-chronological overview of concepts concerning adult learning theory is provided. The same is true with the works relating to educational leadership. An examination of relevant literature as it pertains to the researcher’s study is also provided.

Self-Actualization: Fulfillment, Inner Purpose

Esteem: Confidence, Achievement, Recognition of and by Others

Social: Friendships, Group Membership, Social Connection

Traits of Self-Directed Learners (Knowles, 1975; Merriam & Brockett, 1997)

Leadership Traits and Characteristics

Characteristics of Adult/Lifelong Learners (Merriam, Caffarela, & Baumgartner, 2007)

Figure 2. The theoretical framework of this study.

Adult Learning, Lifelong Learning, and Self-directed Learning

Adult learning. For an accurate determination of what literature is relevant for a study of adult, self-directed learners, and a better understanding of what literature could be garnered from the field of educational leadership, a data search was conducted using keywords from these disciplines. Most of the widely accepted theories appeared more than once in multiple sources. Terms that have become a regular part of the academic vernacular were used beginning with andragogy, a term defined as, “the art and science of helping adults learn” (Knowles, 1980, p. 43). Malcolm Knowles introduced this term from Europe in an article written in the early 1970s. Whether attending conferences; 16

listening to lectures; or doing research on adult learners, lifelong learning, or self-directed learning, among many other subjects and environments; this term appears. There were many other terms used; however, this dissertation is not so much about the terms, as it is about those who use them to construct their work.

For the purposes of this study, continuing education and lifelong learning is under the umbrella of adult learning. Both of these terms may be used to describe aspects of the adult learner, how they learn, and why it is beneficial to the learners. For individuals to pursue an avid interest in any field for a period of time, both terms are appropriate for this study.

The foundations for how people learn, be it children or adults, can be traced back to Confucius, and later Socrates. Confucius was one of the first to advocate the virtues of an education. Socrates, in contrast, never wrote any of his theories down, it was left to one of his students, Plato, to convey the notion that man must always be in quest of knowledge. These were the first rudimentary proponents of what is now termed self- directed learning. Further discussion will ensue about lifelong and self-directed learning.

Lifelong learning. John Locke wrote of his notion concerning “tabula rasa,” or blank slate theory (Locke, 1690/1905, p. 2). Locke argued that individuals were born without any knowledge at all and it was the responsibility of others who have come before to pass along their knowledge; thus, beginning the “nature versus nurture” argument. While the writings of seminal scholars are not the focus of this paper, it would be remiss not to mention how long the need to continually seek knowledge throughout one’s life has been espoused.

The term lifelong learner is currently used to describe what early scholars encouraged. The motivation for learning may be traced to the fulfillment of Maslow’s

(1943) hierarchy of needs theory. Beyond the basic physiological needs of food, clothing, shelter, breathing, sleep, and water, the need or motivation to learn could be included into every category of needs in Maslow’s pyramid. These needs include safety and security (i.e., employment), love and belonging (i.e., sense of connection), self- esteem (all facets), and self-actualization (all facets). A more recent examination of pertinent literature supports Maslow’s work.

Bloom et al.’s taxonomy of learning (1956) maintains that there are six distinct levels of learning, with each level becoming more advanced and specifically useful.

They are; knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.

Adult learners are capable of each level of understanding depending on learning goals.

Understanding how these concepts are interrelated is helpful when developing learning programs for adults.

A term that warrants scrutiny regarding adult education is that of Knowles’ (1975) assumptions concerning andragogy. While the term is crucial to the foundation of adult learning, Knowles does have his detractors. Yet, even in their analysis, their contribution has expanded the understanding of the term, and what it encompasses. The six learning principles of andragogy as stated by Knowles are:

1. Learner’s need to know

2. Self-concept of the learner

3. Prior experience of the learner

4. Readiness to learn

5. Orientation to learning

6. Motivation to learn

Various articles have listed Knowles’ (1975) principles as assumptions, as

Knowles does himself. The term “principles” is used when referring to effective practices for facilitating learning. Kauffman (2002), Baumgartner (2001), Merriam

(2001), and Brookfield (2000) use the term assumptions when referring to the principles.

In a 2001 article, Merriam stated there are “five assumptions underlying andragogy” (p.

5). Yet, in a 2007 book edited by Merriam et al., they cited a 1984 article of Knowles’:

“Knowles originally advanced the following four assumptions…” (p. 84). Baumgartner

(2001, as cited in Merriam et al., 2007) cited the six assumptions used in many texts and articles, while acknowledging 13 principles of adult teaching from which Knowles constructed his andragogical process design.

To muddle things further, Holton, Swanson, and Naquin, in a 2001 article, “shows the six principles (or assumptions) of the current model,” (p. 120) yet wrote that,

“andragogy was originally presented with four assumption numbers” (p. 120). Holton et al. (2008) also referred to the principles that facilitate adult learning as steps of which there were originally seven: “Recently, he [Knowles] added a new first step, preparing learners for the program, which brought the total to eight steps” (pp. 120–121).

Baumgartner (2001) concurred with this number (8) even though Kauffman (2002) and

Brookfield (1984) did not.

Andragogy, for the purpose for this study, is defined as “the art and science of helping adults learn” (Knowles, 1980, p. 43). It then follows, the assumptions, as they are written, mean understanding why adults learn and how it differs from how a child

learns, what motivates adults to learn, and how adults process the knowledge they gain while incorporating life experiences.

Self-directed learning. Houle (1961), one of the pioneers in the area of self- directed learning, found that adult learners fell into three groups: goal-oriented learners who learn because they want to accomplish a goal; activity-oriented learners who do not really care what the subject is as long as they are engaged; and learning-oriented learners, those who learn for the sake of learning. This principle is evident in the bodies of work of Knowles (1980), Merriam (2005), Guglielmino (2008), Baumgartner (2001),

Caffarella & O’Donnell (1987), as well as Kramlinger and Huberty (1990). Bloom et al.

(1956) also encompass these three forms of learning.

Self-direction, one of the core tenets of andragogy, is a term not only used in the assumptions, but also in the steps or principles (6, 7, or 8 of which are a part of the theory depending on the theorist) for creating an effective adult learning environment that is implemented by the instructor, teacher, or ideally, facilitator. Self-direction plays a significant role for the adult learner and corresponds directly to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs as well.

The debate continues as to the theoretical worthiness of andragogy and its assumptions. Each assumption has come under scrutiny over the years and been the subject of scholarly analysis. The researcher’s own studies, both in the field and concerning this study, confirms the six assumptions of andragogy with varying degrees of exactness and legitimacy. What has not been confirmed with any amount of certainty are the eight principles, as Baumgartner (2001) puts it, that, “should guide and organize andragological learning;” reminding one of Brookfield’s 1986 skeptical assessment of

andragogy as a “proven theory” (p. 98). Again, the importance is not so much the precise definition of the term andragogy, but the understanding and debate it has initiated with other scholars in examining adult learning. Studies by both Wolf (1986) and Lamb and

Brady (2005) support andragogy as defined, in addition to the need for leadership in adult education to have adult learning involved in programs that appeal and facilitate their learning needs.

Leadership

The terms and theories surrounding leadership, various forms of leadership, and those who possess leadership are as diverse and semantically challenged as those terms and theories that involve adult education. The same may be said for studies that have been conducted examining those who, through self-directed learning, became experts in an avocation. Brookfield (1981) and Gibbons et al. (1980) have both examined unrelated individuals who became experts. The individuals themselves may be unique to a degree due to their high level of self-directedness and achievement; however, what makes this study unique, is the examination of an entire group of individuals who have become experts in the same field as an avocation. Determinations by Brookfield and Gibbons et al. may share similarities with the study here and may provide additional support for the research conducted. One aspect they have both alluded to that reinforces the altered

Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs in the theoretical framework previously mentioned, is that of “actualization of their [learners] own potential” (Gibbons et al., 1980, p. 42).

Leadership characteristics. The adage “Many are called, few are chosen,”

(Matt. 22:14 New American Standard Version) is emblematic of those who are leader

material. However, scholarship suggests that of these few chosen, they possess varied leadership skills and qualities (Northouse, 2010) (see Table 2).

Table 2

Select Studies of Leadership Traits and Characteristics in Chronological Order

Stogdill (1948) Mann (1959) Stogdill (1974) Lord, Kirkpatrick Zaccaro, Kemp, & DeVader, & & Locke Bader (2004) Alliger (1991) (1986)

Intelligence Intelligence Achievement Intelligence Drive Cognitive Ability

Alertness Masculinity Persistence Masculinity Motivation Extroversion

Insight Adjustment Insight Dominance Integrity Conscientiousness

Responsibility Dominance Initiative Confidence Emotional Stability

Initiative Extroversion Self-Confidence Cognitive Openness Ability

Persistence Conservatism Responsibility Task Agreeableness Knowledge

Self- Cooperativeness Motivation confidence

Sociability Tolerance Social Intelligence

Influence Self-monitoring

Sociability Emotional Intelligence

Problem Solving

What constitutes a leader? What leadership qualities and characteristics does one need to possess to have the ability to lead? If one is able to lead and happens to possess the qualities and characteristics necessary, are they able to incorporate them when planning and instituting programs for adult learners? Adult learners who wish to continue their education have learning preferences. Many older adult learners want to be

taught by experts, in a formal or semi-formal environment, with a lecture combined with shared learning experiences, either relating to the expert or their own experiences common or identifiable with other adult learners, in a particular setting (Delahaye &

Ehrich, 2008; Truluck & Courtenay, 2010). Successful facilitation of this type of preferred learning for adults requires certain leadership qualities beyond being well versed in the subject material. The adult learner, due to their vast life experience or familiarity with the subject material, looks to the expert or learning facilitator for guidance and relevance. The adult educator needs to be able to identify the learner’s needs and motivations and then be able to address them.

Early work by Stogdill (1948) determined that no particular set of traits were apparent in leaders as opposed to non-leaders, but rather the characteristics of the leaders were beneficial based on a particular situation. However, later work by Stogdill (1974) concluded that there indeed were valuable characteristics a leader possesses. Mann’s work in 1959 suggested that personality traits could be used to determine leaders from non-leaders.

Bass (1990), Bennis and Nanus (1985), and most recently Zaccaro (2007), among others, have asserted that charismatic or visionary leaders possess particular traits. The majority of the group members observed behavior in this study possess what would fit the parameters of charismatic leadership according to scholars. In addition, the 2006 work of

Jung and Sosik and their insights into charismatic leadership qualities also support certain behaviors of the group. The concepts that charismatic leaders, “possess traits of self- monitoring…and motivation to attain self-actualization” (Jung & Sosik, 2006, p. 13) are traits that most of the SABR group member participants exhibited in the 2011 pilot study

by this researcher at the 2011 Frederick Ivor-Campbell Conference on 19th Century

Baseball History in Cooperstown, New York. This notion corresponds to several of the traits determined by the work Stogdill published in 1974, such as, “drive for responsibility and task completion; vigor and persistence in pursuit of goals; and the ability to influence other people’s behavior” (as cited in Northouse, 2010, p. 17), although some group members may be unaware that they are doing so.

Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991) may be closest in their findings as to what traits most group members theoretically hold. Their six determinants were, “drive, motivation, integrity, confidence, cognitive ability, and task knowledge” (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991, p. 49). These leadership traits as determined by Kirkpatrick and Locke correlate to

Senge’s claims of systems thinking because of an awareness of the participant group’s ability to “pull their diverse functions and talents into a productive whole” (as cited in

Bolman & Deal, 2008, pp. 34–35).

Bolman and Deal (2008) examined leadership through four frame constructs, and identified those whose work has been previously mentioned concerning leadership characteristics. In their effort to reframe leadership as a step toward reframing organizations, through the research of others, Bolman and Deal bring to light many of the very characteristics exhibited by the SABR group members being examined, perhaps evidence of the group’s progress and success built on what Kuhnert (1994) refers to as leadership in learning for the greater good. While this is not a complete list of every scholar who has authored work, or identified the characteristics of leaders in their research, there are commonalities of those contained here that together create a sufficient

overview for a group of participants for a qualitative dissertation case study such as this one.

A goal-oriented approach to leadership when planning programs for adult learners can be found in theories including; authentic leadership, path-goal, skills, narcissist, trait, team, situational, and psychodynamic. Understanding these leadership theories helps in the understanding of some of the findings of this study. In addition, as more research is conducted regarding this study’s topic, each adult learning and leadership principle will expand comprehension about adult learners and their motivations for learning.

This overview is not meant to claim all theories located herein as absolute. They are mentioned due to their contributions to the field and how they aid when forming opinions and ideas related to the adult learner. While the list of scholars is far from complete, those who best represent the knowledge base for conceptualizing the relation to this study work satisfy the need for familiarity and understanding.

Transformational leadership. Burns asserted that the transformational leader is one who can “tap the motives of followers in order to better reach the goals of leaders and followers” (as cited in Northouse, 2010, p. 172). Transformational leaders are focused on the needs and motives of followers to try to help them reach their maximum capabilities. As stated by Brookfield (1986), “In the process, adults may come to explore affective, cognitive and psychomotor domains they previously had not perceived as relevant to themselves” (p. 214). If the subject matter is delivered to adult learners in this transformational way, by an authentic transformational leader, this newly acquired knowledge should, as Freire posited, “raise their awareness about their life situations” (as cited in Merriam et al., 2007, p. 141). For a transformational leader to be truly effective

according to House (1976), they must possess charisma, have a strong desire to influence others, and appear competent to followers; all characteristics useful to those facilitating learning experiences for adults.

Baseball History Literature

The importance of the game in a societal context has grown enormously. For the past 173 years, thousands of books and journal and periodical articles have been written about every conceivable aspect of “America’s Game” (Walt Whitman, as cited in Thorn,

2012, para. 4). The researcher attended a conference as a field study course requirement, that focused on an area of baseball history in which he has considerable expertise, 19th century baseball history. While observing the conference proceedings and those who participated during the pilot study, the researcher realized that he had, through the eyes of a researcher, discovered things truly unique about the group of individuals engaged in this form of self-directed learning and the research that they conducted. In order to gain a further understanding of the experiences and motivations of historians of 19th century baseball history and support of baseball history as a truly worthy academic endeavor, the researcher determined that the avocation may best be served to discover the baseball topics that are scrutinized today and see if these same topics are motivators to those who study them. A variation of a common axiom uttered in reference to any historical arena is, “In order to understand where we are, we have to know and understand where we’ve been;” a thread shared by many of the 19th century baseball historians (most recently, J.

Thorn, personal communication, April 18, 2014).

Historical Relevance of Baseball Research

Whether or not an individual is familiar with the game of baseball, or has little or no knowledge of the game and the institution it has spawned, it is undeniable that baseball is part of the fabric of American culture by the notion that many Americans, and people from other countries as well, own a baseball cap. It does not matter what symbol, if any, adorn the front of the cap, it is a baseball cap nonetheless. This iconic accouterment represents baseball’s relevancy on a multicultural level.

The relevance of baseball history can be noted in the trials of Jackie Robinson, the famed Brooklyn Dodger whom general manager, Branch Rickey, employed and who integrated baseball in 1947. This landmark event occurred eight years before Rosa Parks refused to move to the back of a bus. Incidentally, Robinson also refused to move to the back of a bus while serving in the military in 1944, 11 years prior to Parks (Rampersad,

1997). The relevance in the 21st century of what is learned from 19th century baseball history is seen in the actions of baseball’s commissioner. The origins of the game of baseball warrant as much, if not more, attention today as during the game’s infancy. On

March 1, 2011, Major League Baseball Commissioner, Bud Selig, named John Thorn the

Official Historian for Major League Baseball (Major League Baseball, 2011). Thorn, a

SABR member, noted author, and chief consultant for Ken Burns’ epic film Baseball, had taken over for sports writer, Jerome Holtzman, who died in 2008 (Major League

Baseball, 2011). The fact that Thorn, a true sports historian, had replaced a sports writer is telling: sports history, notably baseball history, is a piece of evidence that supports baseball history as a field that demands scholarly representation.

One of Thorn’s responsibilities in his capacity as Major League Baseball’s

Official Historian, is to try to find the “real” origins of the game. English-born New York

Times cricket journalist, Henry Chadwick, tried to do the same after the Civil War in the latter 19th century. His findings were spurned by Albert Goodwill Spalding who chafed at the notion that the game was not invented by noted Civil War hero, Abner Doubleday.

What Chadwick found would diminish the patriotic connection. Thus, Spalding convinced then Commissioner, A. G. Mills, to form a committee to discover and confirm the “true origins” of baseball. As now many baseball aficionados know, that committee’s findings were totally false. This was done through the tireless work of today’s 19th century baseball historians (Block, 2005). The topic of the origins of baseball does not get as much media scrutiny as other aspects of the game of baseball; however, it is still noteworthy that the evolution of the game from its beginnings demands just as much interest as any other subject.

Baseball Statistics

Henry Chadwick, was an early avid baseball proponent. In 1860, when he was editing Beadle’s Dime Base-ball Player, he developed the first in-game scoring system.

Today, it is known as a box score. If not for this development, the game, its fans, and its personnel may not have the ongoing love affair with all things statistical.

Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game (2003), a book written by

Michael Lewis, was recently made into a movie where Brad Pitt’s character conveys with some amount of exasperation, “They keep track of everything. Everything in this game is about numbers” (Bakshi & Miller, 2011). And just that quickly baseball has gone from

1860 to 2002 (the season being depicted in the movie Moneyball [2011]).

During a typical Major League baseball season, the morning following a game, box scores appear in newspapers across the country. Websites post all game statistics while each game is in progress. Televised games have crawls with a variety of statistics, as well as line scores during the duration of the broadcast. At the season’s conclusion, awards are given to those who statistically distinguished themselves. This is the effect of

Chadwick’s invention and that subsequent refinement of his in-game scoring system and the value it held in the 19th century. As it did in the 19th century, today’s box score keeps people connected to the game. In the 19th century, statistics were a valuable tool in gaining more fans and spreading the growing interest in the game. Today, statistics provide a similar incentive. They keep fans abreast of the goings on with their favorite teams and/or players. Statistics generate more interest in the game, thus more emphasis is placed on them, particularly when they have so much to do with who wins and who loses each game.

Accuracy in compiling these statistics is paramount. Firms and sports information personnel are hired to keep accurate accounts, not only of all game statistics, but also each individual statistic that is closely monitored. Balls and strikes are counted. How often a certain pitch is used throughout a game and under what circumstances is counted.

Myriad files are compiled. However, this was not always the case. Statistical categories have expanded greatly over the years. With every new statistic, there is an interest in how the numbers compiled in eras past compare to those of today. There are a group of

19th century SABR members whose interest lies in this type of research only. These individuals pour over every possible long ago newspaper account of each game to gain some semblance of historical statistical comparison and accuracy. As long as excellence

of play and contracts are negotiated based on statistical performance, there will be individuals who will research what separated elite players of the day be it the 19th, 20th, or even the 21st centuries (Thorn, Birnbaum, & Deane, 2004).

Social Mobility and Baseball

The story of the plight of Blacks and their marginalization from baseball is well documented. Dark skinned Cubans and Native Americans also found themselves on the outside looking in for a period of the 19th and 20th centuries (Seymour, 1990). Currently players from 18 countries are represented on Major League rosters. Over the course of the game’s professional history, players from 50 different countries and U.S. territories have played at the Major League level, as listed on the chart below (see Table 3). In

2012, there were 243 foreign-born players on Major League rosters (Major League

Baseball, 2012).

The evolution and spreading of the popularity of the game have contributed mightily to this statistic. However, in the early years when baseball was a fraternal organization played by amateurs, rosters were not so ethnically diverse. Most players were middle and upper class men who were employed as artisans, lawyers, clerks, and doctors (Goldstein, 1989). It was not until winning became the premier reason for engaging in a baseball contest did laborers and recent immigrants no longer fear exclusion. With winning brought gambling, this was the stepping-stone to the sport’s professionalism. If people were making money from the players competing, then the players wanted to be compensated for their labor.

Table 3

Major League Baseball Player Country of Origin Outside of the United States (Palmer &

Gillette, 2016)

Country Number of Players Country Number of Players Afghanistan 1 Italy 7 American Samoa 1 Jamaica 4 Aruba 5 Japan 62 At Sea 1 Lithuania 1 Australia 28 Mexico 118 Austria 4 Netherlands 12 Bahamas 6 Nicaragua 14 Belgium 1 Norway 3 Belize 1 Panama 55 Brazil 3 Philippines 1 Canada 244 Poland 5 China 1 Puerto Rico 250 Colombia 16 Russian Federation 8 Cuba 192 Saudi Arabia 2 Curacao 14 Singapore 1 Czech Republic 3 Slovakia 1 Denmark 1 South Korea 17 Dominican Republic 637 Spain 4 Finland 1 Sweden 4 France 8 Switzerland 1 Germany 42 Taiwan 11 Greece 1 U.S. Virgin Islands 12 Guam 1 United Kingdom 47 Honduras 1 Venezuela 338 Indonesia 1 Viet Nam 1 Ireland 47

In an effort to gain a certain amount of civic pride, organizers of amateur baseball matches would often pay the best players to ensure victory. Henry Eckford, a Scottish ship builder, would enlist his most baseball-able employees, regardless of position, when he would field a team when playing one from a rival city. There would be a little something extra in their pay should they decide to participate (Rader, 2002). One factory owner even went so far as to pay the $300 conscription fee so his best player—a low- level maintenance worker—would not have to serve in the Union army during the Civil

War (Kirsch, 2003). With the prospect of such enticements, these newly immigrated

Americans saw a way to not only assimilate themselves into American society, but also a way to earn a wage more substantial than any job available to them at the time. With that said, this is not unlike what happens today, albeit today the process is much better organized.

It is not frowned upon to play baseball for a living, quite the contrary. In fact, today, many cultures hold reaching professional status as a baseball player in high regard.

However, this was not always the case. Once professionalism dominated the American baseball landscape of the 19th century, parents often tried to sway their young men from engaging in such unruly employment. Nineteenth century ballplayers had reputations for fighting, drinking, and cursing, unseemly characteristics for those of the Victorian period.

However, the pay was nearly 20 times that of the wages these same individuals could attain with their traditional vocational skill sets (Riess, 1980). The behavioral perceptions may not have changed contextually, but the times and wages certainly have.

Today, ballplayer wages equal or surpass many high-level executive business positions.

This is the enticement today for many young men from poverty-stricken backgrounds,

foreign or domestic. Baseball and other sports are perceived as a way out of dire financial circumstances. Not only is the socio-economic impact studied closely today and in the 19th century, the narratives of these players are frequently scrutinized as well

(Muret, 2012).

The topic of social mobility via the game of baseball has been scrutinized and theorized by numerous historians, sociologists, and baseball historians of all eras. Harold

Seymour, called the “Father of Baseball History,” who wrote his dissertation, The Rise of

Major League Baseball to 1891, at Cornell in the 1956, later became the foundation for his three-volume work on baseball history (1990). Benjamin Rader, Baseball: A History of America’s Game (2002), Jules Tygiel, Past Time: Baseball as History (2000), and

Steven Riess’ (1999) works are all notable as well. The efforts of Jerrold Casway (2004), whose focus is on Irish assimilation into American culture, and George B. Kirsch,

Baseball in Blue and Gray: The National Pastime during the Civil War (2003), are particularly subject specific.

Labor and Baseball

Not a week goes by that some aspect of baseball labor is not mentioned in Street

& Smith’s Sports Business Journal (Mullen, 2012), whether it’s revenue sharing or the purging of a team’s labor, the hiring or advancement of executives and staff, or agents and contract negotiations. All facets of labor in the realm of baseball are fodder for periodicals, television, and radio media. This is also true of baseball’s labor issues in the

19th century.

The labor strife began with gambling and the introduction of professionalism

(Thorn et al., 2004). If others were making money off their play, then the ballplayers

themselves wanted “a piece of the action.” Charging admission was the next step toward the sharing of revenue. Winning teams brought more fans, and more fans meant more money. This might seem like an obvious fact, but ballplayers were not privy to the amount of gate receipts collected for any particular game.

Ballplayers were paid on a per game basis regardless of how many fans showed up (Goldstein, 1989). It was also obvious that more populated areas could sustain larger regular crowds, a basis for franchise viability today. Ballplayers would flock to these urban baseball meccas and sell their services to the highest bidder. The practice was known as “revolving” (Rader, 2002), an early form of free agency. However, owners were quick to put a stop to it by developing a salary scale much like the new practice installed that is affecting today’s draft choices. The higher the perceived quality of a player based on previous performance, the higher level wages to which they were entitled, and the wages would diminish incrementally (Hawking, 2012). In addition, players were virtually contracted for life to one team with the elimination of revolving, which was a complaint often voiced by players before free agency began in the early

1970s (Bouton, 1970).

The first attempt to organize ballplayers and make them aware that their rights as working men were being violated, was headed by John Montgomery Ward, an eventual

Hall of Fame player and Columbia law school graduate. Ward challenged baseball’s anti-trust restrictions and formed a players’ league in response to owners’ unwillingness to negotiate improved labor practices. The players’ league eventually folded and the labor relationship would remain essentially status quo for nearly nine decades (Seymour,

1990). It is these issues that arose in the 19th century, that when academically researched, provides a better understanding of labor relations in baseball today.

Baseball and Industry

As all encompassing as the term labor may be, the business of baseball has many offshoots. Advertising, endorsements, equipment, vendors, product placement; the list goes on and on. Stadiums where baseball games are conducted now have naming rights bestowed upon the highest bidder for all elements associated with the game. Once, stadiums were shrines to those that built them or to the owners of the teams that played in them. The contrast in stadium naming evolution is as significant as the revenues that built these ballparks. Baseball fields were symbols of civic pride and their names often reflected that. The name of a ballpark is no longer just a place where a baseball game takes place, it is an arena for various companies and vendors to hawk their wares (Muret,

2012; Pastore, 2011).

From baseball has sprung so many other related industries that it would take another study to cover just a fraction. Each industry created, a multi-million dollar business in its own right, and gives the indication of what a ubiquitous business baseball has become.

The following list provides just a glimpse into the impact baseball has had on today’s industry:

• The very first baseball player cards were inserted in cigarette packages;

• The first uniform companies whose primary customers were fire and police

departments made baseball uniforms (Ward & Burns, 1994);

• The first true baseball entrepreneur, Albert Goodwill Spalding was a player,

owner, publisher, and sporting goods magnate (Thorn, 2011);

• The American League was formed so that team owners, who were also brewery

owners, could sell their product to patrons (Wolff, 1996).

Each served as the foundation of today’s corporate environment that is Major League

Baseball.

The design of the study appears in the following Chapter 3 with an explanation of the proposed research design, purposeful sampling plan and participants, instrumentation and data collection plan, and data analysis plan. An explanation of the subjects in the study is given as well as the instrumentation used, the data collection methods, and the locale. Chapter 4 includes the results from the data collected and a detailed analysis.

Chapter 5 includes the conclusions, recommendations, and summarization of the findings.

III. DESIGN OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore and describe the experiences of a group of adult learners who produce the seminal work in the field of

19th century baseball history as an avocation. The research design of the study is constructed to obtain the maximum amount of pertinent data to adequately address the research question, and subsequent sub-questions.

Baseball Research (SABR) members that to help yield maximum insight. These include:

1. Do the selected members of the SABR group exhibit traits and characteristics that

can be considered those of self-directed learners based on the Self-Directed

Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) criteria (Guglielmino, 1977)?

2. What established theorized characteristics of adult learners are shared by this

particular group?

3. What leadership characteristics are identifiable among the selected members of

SABR?

The case study methodology was chosen based on the definition of a case study as, posited by Yin (2003), as, “an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real life context, when the boundaries between phenomenon and the context are not clearly evident, and in which multiple sources of evidence are used”

(p. 33). A case study involves a detailed description of a setting and the participants, accompanied by the analysis of data for themes and patterns (Merriam, 1998; Stake,

1995). According to Yin (2003), the case is unique (intrinsic) and requires analysis of data that deals with parts of the case, as well as the whole (holistic, embedded). Merriam also stated that analysis is rich in the framework of the case or setting in which the case presents itself. This supports the decision for the methodology to be a case study. There were other possible methodologies explored, but they proved to be not as encompassing as a case study, whereas:

• Case study involves a detailed description of a setting and the participants,

accompanied by the analysis of data for themes and patterns (Merriam, 1998;

Stake, 1995).

• The case is unique (intrinsic).

• Analysis of data deals with parts of the case, as well as the whole (holistic,

embedded) (Yin, 2003).

• Analysis is rich in the framework of the case or setting in which the case presents

itself (Merriam, 1998).

This particular case study included a thorough description of the setting and the participants, supplemented with a data analysis comprised of establishing themes and patterns (Merriam, 1998; Stake, 1995). A qualitative design provides the means necessary to most accurately describe the contemporary phenomenon using the components as asserted by Maxwell (1996).

Research Sample

The purposeful sample consisted of a self-selected group of six Society for

American Baseball Research (SABR) members at the 2015 Frederick Ivor-Campbell

Conference on 19th Century Baseball History which took place at the National Baseball

Hall of Fame located in Cooperstown, New York from April 17–19, 2015. All participants were required to have a current SABR membership. A membership list was obtained from SABR to confirm active membership. There were no age restrictions to help minimize bias and give a better overview of group members.

Criteria for selection of the interview participants included:

• SABR membership;

• those who contributed descriptive statistics and commentary;

• those whose behavior was observed by the researcher individually or with the

group;

• those who were interview participants had to have attended the Frederick Ivor-

Campbell Conference on 19th Century Baseball History for each of the past five

years that the researcher has attended (2011–2015); and

• self-selection.

These criteria were important in ensuring that participants were avid members of the 19th century history aspect of SABR and were consistently engaged with the researcher and his capacity as a SABR member, participant, and observer.

Study Site

The site where the study took place was based on the results of a previous pilot study for course credit that was conducted in 2011 by the researcher. As previously

mentioned, the researcher attended the Frederick Ivor-Campbell Conference on 19th

Century Baseball History for several years at The National Baseball Hall of Fame and

Museum located in Cooperstown, New York. This was both an attempt in self-education and a means to establish a comfort zone with potential participants.

The boundaries of Cooperstown were settled upon by Judge William Cooper, of

Burlington, New Jersey, who took possession of the deed to the land known as Cooper’s

Patent in 1783 (Cooper, 1838). He was the father of the American novelist James

Fenimore Cooper, noted for his work, The Last of the Mohicans. Located on the southern shores of Lake Otsego, Cooperstown is an idyllic village that has served as “a favorite place of resort” for “adjacent savage tribes” (Cooper, 1838, p. 5), to vacationers of today.

Cooperstown is tucked away among the rolling hills about an hour’s drive from the

Adirondack Mountains. The nearest major city is Albany, New York, the State’s capital, approximately 70 miles away. This picturesque enclave was found appealing by several notable individuals who have made their homes here. Vacation homes dot the hillsides that rise up from either side of the lake, with Cooperstown located at the southernmost end. The village and surrounding area look much like it did 40 years ago thanks in part to Jane Forbes Clark, great-granddaughter of Edward Clark, who partnered with Isaac

Merritt Singer in 1851 to form the Singer Manufacturing Company, noted for sewing machines, and the concept of buying merchandise on credit (Weber, 2007). Ms. Clark bought available land—“she owns or influences virtually everything here in town” (J.

Smerk, personal communication, April 20, 2014), and a variety of buildings throughout the village and surrounding areas in order to maintain the quaint rustic feel. No franchise businesses are allowed in town, save a CVS pharmacy. Chain businesses are located in

adjacent municipalities. Two traffic lights serve the village of roughly 2,000 year-round residents. Main Street bisects the one and a half square mile area of the village of which the entirety is a National Historic District. At several points along Main Street, signs warn vehicle operators to stop for pedestrians. The researcher has witnessed a summons being issued to a transgressor.

Ms. Clark is not the only person of notoriety to take up residence in Cooperstown.

The one-time “hops center of the United States” (J. Smerk, personal communication,

April 20, 2014), until a blight hit toward the end of Prohibition, was enough to entice beer entrepreneur August Busch, to build a family summer estate on the outskirts of

Cooperstown. After the blight, Busch moved his hops operation to Oregon.

The purported invention of the game of baseball by Abner Doubleday in 1839, since disclaimed, took place by the lakeside. It is for this reason alone that the village is home to the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum. Looking to revive tourism that had died off during the depression, Stephen Clark, grandfather to Jane, capitalized on the Doubleday myth by proposing The National Baseball Hall of Fame idea (J. Smerk, personal communication, April 20, 2014). The first class was elected in 1936. In 1939, the Hall of Fame was opened to visitors. It occupies the former town library with several additions added through the years with monies from Ms. Clark’s various charitable foundations.

Such a setting is a conducive, intimate, learning environment where learners can feel at ease, and cultivate existing relationships with other learners. There are approximately 300 historians of 19th century baseball in the United States (estimate given by SABR members). This site serves the intimate study group members (49

historians of 19th century baseball) well, and although the Bullpen Theater area of the A.

Bartlett Giamatti Research Center only holds 55 individuals, of the group being studied, five were spouses of attendees.

Research Setting

The setting for the data collection is a crucial aspect of this study. The location for the study was selected due to the nature of the learning environment. The Frederick

Ivor-Campbell Conference on 19th Century Baseball History taking place at the National

Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum supports and promotes an intimate, community- focused learning environment for the study.

Research Questions

The primary research question of this study was: What are the experiences of historians of 19th century baseball who produce the seminal work in the field as an avocation? Through interviews and observations as a participant as observer, their experiences and motivations revealed a unique group of lifelong learners. The study of these individuals was done to add new insights and support existing theories concerning adult, self-directed, lifelong learners as put forth by Brookfield (1984), Bandura (1982),

Kauffman (2002), Knowles (1975, 1980), Merriam (2001), Wolf (1986), Caffarella

(1993), Lamb and Brady (2005), and others, regarding the significance of self-directed learning and engagement in continued educational endeavors for successful lifelong learning. The following interview questions were developed for the Society for

American Baseball Research (SABR) members that helped yield maximum insight.

These included:

1. What motivates the selected members of SABR to continue their own research in

this area of study? 42

2. What are the shared characteristics, if any, of the selected members of SABR?

3. What are the unique characteristics, if any, of the selected members of SABR?

4. Do the selected members of SABR group exhibit traits and characteristics that can

be considered those of self-directed learners based on the Self-Directed Learning

Readiness Scale (SDLRS) criteria (Guglielmino, 1977)?

5. Based on the views of the participants, why, or why not, is the researching of 19th

century baseball history relevant to the 21st century?

6. What is the attraction of baseball and its history as an adult learning tool, and why

is it a worthy field of academic study?

7. What established theorized characteristics of adult learners are shared by this

particular group?

8. What leadership characteristics are identifiable among the selected members of

SABR? (See Appendix F)

Participant Recruitment

Contact with prospective interview participants was completed prior to the conference to assure for timely and convenient interviews. A relationship with members of the sample group had already been established through attendance at previous conferences, which was anticipated by the researcher to expedite cooperation. If additional information was needed to be gathered, it was determined prior to the conference that this could be accomplished via written or verbal correspondence electronically via computer programs, or by more conventional means, such as telephone or mail. As a member of the SABR organization, the researcher had established

trustworthiness with the SABR group and the group in turn had demonstrated a high need for accuracy as demonstrated in their responses to the 2011 pilot study.

A consent form approved by FAU’s Institutional Review Board was presented to each of the participants to sign prior to each of their interviews stating their understanding concerning the research and publication of the findings and any chance of harm that may come to them by participating in this proposed study, although no harm was anticipated (see Appendix A and Appendix B).

Instrumentation

The instrument used in garnering much of the pertinent data was an open-ended interview protocol that addressed the research question and sub-questions (see Appendix

C). Document review and observational data were also collected to triangulate the data in this case study (see Appendix D). The interview protocol had been developed as part of the pilot study.

Data Collection Plan

Each interview was scheduled for no more than one hour. Interviews were automatically cataloged, labeled, and recorded by a digital recorder to facilitate later transcription and coding. Two recorders were used in the event of product failure.

Comprehensive field notes were taken throughout the conference, after observation, and during interviews. See the Data Analysis Plan and Coding section that follows for a more detailed description. An audio transcriber was used to convert the interviews from tapes to electronic files. Then, the researcher listened and verified the typed account of the interviews. All interview transcriptions were member-checked by the participants prior to analysis.

Following the review of the data, all information was saved on a password protected USB drive. At the end of three years, the data will be erased from the password protected USB file, and any paper copies of the interviews will be destroyed. The following steps were taken during the data collection process as applicable to the study participants:

• Interviews with six SABR group members who have attended the Frederick Ivor-

Campbell Conference on 19th Century Baseball History for five consecutive

years.

o 17 of the 49 SABR group members at the 2015 conference attended for all

five years.

o Interview Participants: five men, one woman.

• Journal entered observations of behavior and conversations among, and with,

SABR group members.

o At conference.

o .At social gatherings of the SABR group.

o All cited group participants signed IRB approved consent forms.

The following steps were followed for the study interview participants:

• Five Interviews were conducted face to face at The Cooperstown Bed &

Breakfast. One Interview took place at The National Baseball Hall of Fame.

• All interviews were between 33 and 57 minutes.

• Interviews were digitally audio recorded on two separate devices.

• All interview questions were semi-structured and open-ended, leaving opportunity

for probes.

• All interviews were manually transcribed verbatim by the researcher in his home

office when the conference had ended.

• Each interview was member checked.

• Document review and observational field notes aided in data triangulation.

Data Analysis Plan and Coding

Tables were created to describe the likeness and differences of the participants.

An overall profile of the SABR study group in this study was part of the developed items shared in the findings in Chapter 4. Descriptive statistics were used to make comparisons of age, gender, employment status, field in which the members are employed, if retired, and their previous position when applicable.

It was determined whether each participant is a baseball fan based on the researcher’s definition of such, and if so, is the individual is a fan of the current game of baseball. Specifically, a probe was used in the interview to determine if each participant is a fan of the game as it exists today to try and determine aspects of the motivations of these individuals.

The data analysis consisted of transcription of interviews, with an ear to carefully listen for words that have been “punched” signifying emphasis. Preliminary word importance was determined via the WORDLE computer program that graphically demonstrates word frequency. Once interviews were transcribed, transcripts were coded for all significant words used by interviewees through the use of a tabulation board and different colored magnetic word plates. The next step of the coding process consisted of examining, defining, and sorting the observational field notes taken to determine whether

the trends that developed through the initial process were consistent with that of the observational field notes.

These were the steps followed during the coding process:

• Phase I: Open coding.

o Text cloud used for key word frequency.

• Phase II: Focused coding.

o Words then placed on magnetic eraser board and color coded designation used

for each interview participant.

• Phase III: Thematic coding.

o Previous coding is studied to identify refined themes.

o All themes are arranged for commonality among participants.

• A priori coding was done to check against previous research and theory

(Bloomberg & Volpe, 2012).

Blind coding was conducted by a colleague at Nova Southeastern University to confirm that the codes were relevant. The colleague was sent the research questions, the interview questions, and the WORDLE printouts. This was done to ensure that no bias existed during the initial coding process.

Research Sub-question 1: Do the selected members of SABR group exhibit traits and characteristics that can be considered those of self-directed learners based on the

Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) criteria (Guglielmino, 1977)? was analyzed with the help of a priori coding to assign narrative responses into clusters that, in part, paralleled with Dr. Guglielmino’s learning preference instrument.

Research Sub-question 2: What established theorized characteristics of adult learners are shared by this particular group? was analyzed by an additional review of the interview transcripts and the questions that pertained to the learning experiences of the interview participants. Once similar patterns emerged that corresponded with the words that were already deemed relevant in the previous coding stages, these words—and subsequent interviewee responses—were grouped together.

Research Sub-question 3: What leadership characteristics are identifiable among the selected members of SABR? was analyzed through an additional review of the interview transcripts and the observational field notes. This was done to determine which observed leadership characteristics became apparent through the interviewee question responses. The potential leadership characteristics were then matched to the leadership characteristics that appear in Table 2.

Throughout the entire study process, documents were reviewed to gather data to provide support or answer questions that arose during the study, including the interviews.

For example, Joanne Hulbert claimed the average age of SABR members to be “around

59.” A document analysis was required to confirm or refute this assertion. Please see

Appendix D for the complete list of documents used for data triangulation.

Observation field notes were taken throughout the entire conference. Included events were: the group luncheon; the semi-formal going away dinner; and the casual dinner following the conclusion of the conference. Also included were conversations with members of the National Baseball Hall of Fame, village residents, and other conference attendees during scheduled breaks in the conference. These notes generally included “time, place, and the purpose of the observation” (Merriam, 2009, p. 130).

Field notes were “highly descriptive” (Merriam, 2009, p. 130) and “reflective,”

(Merriam, 2009, p. 131). Particular attention was paid to the leadership characteristics exhibited in a relaxed non-conference setting and noted in the observer’s comment section of the field notes. Also of importance, when the opportunity presented itself, was discussion regarding adult education using baseball as the subject matter. Verbal descriptions of the setting, the people, and the activities were important to note in this process. This was done in order to provide thick, rich data. Those in attendance were quick and thoughtful in their responses. All subjects discussed were treated with great reverence due to all study participants awareness of the participant as observer’s role.

Validity and Reliability

In order to strengthen the findings of this case study, all interviews were member- checked with the individual interviewees thereby sanctioning use of his/her transcripts.

The researcher’s journal, that included all running field notes since all notes were taken in real time, was also used for triangulation, as well as a research audit trail. Blind coding, as described on page 47, was conducted by a colleague to address any bias that may have inadvertently been exhibited by the researcher. The note taking process is described in Table 4.

Table 4

Observation Protocol

Descriptive Notes Reflective Notes

Notes were taken during observation with the primary research question in mind (What are the experiences of historians of 19th century baseball who produce the seminal work in the field as an avocation?)

An interview was conducted with a longtime The primary landowner is the heir to the Singer village resident to provide a thick and rich sewing machine fortune. I wonder how the setting. village residents feel about living in a place made by such a large influence?

Conference Day 1: Observed interactions, body Many of us have worn the same clothing each language, clothing, and presentations. Took year. David Block flies in from San Francisco copious notes throughout entire day, even every year? Wow! during break periods. First interview takes place.

Conference Day 2: Interviews begin in the Interview participants take the task at hand morning. They are conducted at the bed and very seriously. They really believe in what the breakfast where the researcher is staying. researcher is doing. They are very relaxed, yet Notes taken throughout each. When in focused. attendance at conference, paid particular attention to anecdotes of study group members.

Group Luncheon: Paid particular attention to There is no distinct power structure among see who sat with whom. Took notes members. concerning keynote speakers address.

Conference concludes: One interview takes There is only one franchise business in the place. Evening drive around village includes village. Ms. Clark (Singer Sewing heir) won’t note taking to support validity of interview with allow any others (a CVS pharmacy). village resident.

Last interview takes place at the National Tom Shieber made sure we would not be Baseball Hall of Fame (HOF). interrupted. Leaves cell phone in his office, and chooses a secluded room off the HOF library as our setting. Six of six interview participants congenial. Genuinely like each other. No facades can be distinguished. Note. Source: Creswell (2013).

The role of the researcher as an observer changed depending upon the circumstance, or environment (see definition of terms). Primarily the researcher was a 50

participant as observer. There were moments where the researcher did feel he assumed the role of complete observer. When group members presented their research, the researcher did feel as though the remaining group members in the audience were focused on the presentation, and then the researcher did feel that the role of complete observer was assumed. The study group members were aware of the researcher, who is a group member, and his intentions concerning the study. This made the role of complete observer difficult to assume, and only in the particular circumstances previously explained. The role of close observer during interviews and during social settings was assumed by the researcher when compiling field notes of the study group. Occasionally an anecdote would be shared where the researcher would reflect on the context of the shared anecdote and how it pertained to the primary research question and/or the sub- questions (Van Manen, 1990).

The research design was set up to strengthen the validity of the research method, as well as the researcher’s interpretations of the data collected and analyzed. The audit trail included the member checked transcripts, the dated field notes, and the taped transcripts, which then offered an opportunity to provide more richness to the data, and aided in the validity of the study. Based on the methodology and literature, the study could be repeated using similar data by others in the field of baseball or other fields of interest. This in turn will allow for transferability of findings that can provide further insight regarding adult learners and those who become experts in personal avocations.

Chapter Summary

Chapter 3 summarized how the data was collected and how it was treated.

Chapter 4 includes results from the data collected and a detailed analysis of the findings, some of which is reported in chart form or as narratives by the interviewees. Chapter 5 follows to address the conclusions, recommendations, and summary of the findings.

IV. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore and describe the experiences of a group of adult learners who produce the seminal work in the field of

19th century baseball history as an avocation. The data were collected through interviews with study participants, field notes, observations, and documents reviewed.

The characteristics of the participants were addressed in this chapter to answer the central research question: What are the experiences of historians of 19th century baseball who produce the seminal work in the field as an avocation? In addition, how the experiences of these individuals contribute to their motivations for learning and produce the seminal work in the field of 19th century baseball history as an avocation will be addressed. The primary research question of this study was: What are the experiences of historians of

19th century baseball who produce the seminal work in the field as an avocation?

However, other sub-questions are explored among the Society for American Baseball

Research (SABR) members that to help yield maximum insight. These include:

1. Do the selected members of the SABR group exhibit traits and characteristics that

can be considered those of self-directed learners based on the Self-Directed

Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) criteria (Guglielmino, 1977)?

2. What established theorized characteristics of adult learners are shared by this

particular group?

3. What leadership characteristics are identifiable among the selected members of

SABR?

The sub-questions pertain to the characteristics of this unique group of SABR members, and if they reflect the accepted characteristics of adult, lifelong, and self-directed learners as posited through scholarly work in those fields.

The interview participants were selected for a purposeful sample for this case study. Besides each study participant having had to have attended each conference for the last five years, they were selected based on their diverse backgrounds and varied level of 19th century baseball history interest and expertise. All group members whose names are used in this study have signed an approved Institutional Review Board (IRB) consent form waiving anonymity. All who signed consent forms wanted their names to be included in the study, believing that using their names would bring credibility to the study, as well as legitimacy to the field of baseball history as a scholarly endeavor.

The earlier pilot study revealed the relevance of all observations, casual conversations, and interactions of all group members. Conference introductions and profiles provided additional insight into the experiences of the group members, as well as each luncheon keynote address. Field notes taken during the pilot study were used to better understand 19th century baseball history.

All of the interviews, save one, with the study participants, took place in the living room of the Cooperstown Bed & Breakfast, where the author stayed each year for the conference. This promoted a relaxed and accommodating environment for the interviews to take place. The owners and other guests were aware of the task at hand, and made sure not to cause any disruption. The facility owners even offered each morning interviewee breakfast and coffee. For the lone evening interview, the owners were equally obliging.

The interview with Tom Shieber took place at the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum. Tom, is the lone study participant who is employed in the field of baseball research. He was most comfortable for the interview to have taken place in this setting.

However, his educational background and former employment make his contribution to the study truly unique.

As part of the purposeful sample criteria, participants had to attend the conference for the five consecutive years, including the current year. Seventeen of the 50 SABR members met this criterion. It was convenient that the participants were as diverse in their backgrounds as they are in their areas of expertise. A female was self-selected to be part of this group. Six—or more than one-third of the five-year participants—were interviewed for this study.

Besides Tom, the other interview subjects were: Richard Hershberger, who makes his living as a paralegal; Joanne Hulbert, an emergency room nurse and paramedic;

Robert Tholkes, retired from Target where he served two tenures as a corporate trainer separated by a stint as a teacher in Australia; Joe Mancuso, a systems engineer, putting his professional musician aspirations on hold; Eric Miklich, a bank manager who has also spent seven years with the New York Islander hockey team. The educational backgrounds of each participant are as varied as their occupations.

Group Participants

The group for the 2015 Frederick Ivor-Campbell Conference on 19th Century

Baseball History was comprised of 55 registrants. Of those, five were wives of the 19th century baseball historians. The remaining 50 were SABR members. All interview participants have been members of SABR for over 10 years. This is important because

the 19th Century Baseball History Conference has been going on for only eight years.

All interviewees have been members prior to the inaugural conference. It can be posited that all participants have an interest in baseball history that extends beyond their area of specialization.

Richard Hershberger. Richard resides in the “semi-rural, semi-ex-urban” city of

Westminster, Maryland. The city is located in north central Maryland, and is the Carroll

County seat. Richard claims that the population is between 15-20,000. Richard drives to the conference each year, as do the rest of the interview participants, except Tom, who lives in Cooperstown. The drive takes each participant an excess of five hours, regardless of where he/she lives.

Several aspects of Richard’s appearance draw one’s attention. Richard is of large frame, graying beard, balding pate, and bespectacled. There is a deep resonance to his voice befitting of one clad in his denim jacket, regardless of weather, and ubiquitous

Indiana Jones-like fedora. Richard stands out as much due to his look, as he does for his numerous contributions to the field of 19th century baseball history.

Richard is congenial and kind, quick with a laugh, and generous in nature; a characteristic shared by each of the participants. Richard never seems hurried, although his schedule demands indicate otherwise. Both the physical and demeanor characteristics observed correspond with several of the leadership traits espoused by Stogdill (1974),

Mann (1959), and Lord et al. (1986) listed in Table 2. As with each interview participant,

Richard readily agreed to help in any way with this study. He has an interest in the current game of baseball, and attends baseball games when he can.

Robert (Bob) Tholkes. Bob does not share Richard’s enthusiasm for the current game, “basically, I read the sports page and follow it, but I did not attend any Major

League games last year, despite being five miles from the ballpark,” in Minneapolis, where the Minnesota Twins of the American League play their home games. Bob’s stature is the very opposite of Richard’s, save the balding pate and glasses. Bob is short and lithe, and dresses for the weather as well as practicality. Bob is soft spoken and deliberate. He measures his words carefully, leaving very little open to interpretation.

His manner of speaking is efficient. Bob tends to be a little more serious when discussing any topic, leaving mirth for more appropriate moments. His sense of humor is dry, but witty. Bob believes himself to be “more of an investigator and compiler, rather than a true historian.” As a Doctor of Education and former corporate trainer for Target,

Bob’s leadership traits listed in Table 2 lean towards Kirkpatrick and Locke’s (1991) and

Zaccaro et al.’s (2004) skills approach models.

Joe Mancuso. Joe is a systems engineer, but his heart belongs to music. When the author met Joe five years ago, he was sporting a receding hairline that ended in a braided, 18-inch long ponytail. Today, Joe looks as if he could easily blend into the corporate America landscape. Joe is taller than Richard, but thinner. There is a power to

Joe’s voice, but understated compared to Richard’s voice. Joe, too, is quick with a laugh, and his enthusiasm for everything about the conference, the participants, and life is infectious. His delivery of speech has a certain level of passion regardless of the topic.

Joe “loves” going to Major League games, emphasizing his interest in baseball in current form. Though he does not go as often as he believes the rest of the members of

the group do, attending Major League games is something he truly enjoys doing with his father.

Joe lives just outside of Princeton, New Jersey, in a wealthy suburb of Trenton located in central western New Jersey. His father, Peter, the conference chairman and coordinator, is just across the Delaware River in New Hope, Pennsylvania; very pertinent data within the context of this study. Joe’s mode of attire has changed from an emphasis on individuality, to representing SABR. His style now, as opposed to five years ago, is similar to that of his father’s in a classic, refined way.

Joe speaks as if time is going to run out before he says everything he wants to on any subject. It’s almost as if there is a need to convey a full understanding and he doesn’t want to leave anything out. Any question elicits a wide-eyed exuberance and demonstrative body language. Besides Joe’s passion, his leadership traits belie those as put forth by Zaccaro et al. (2004) in Table 2, yet lend to those characteristics as pertaining to transformational or authentic leadership in theoretical context.

Joanne Hulbert. The obvious characteristic that sets Joanne apart from the other interview participants’ is her gender. She was selected for this study based on that fact.

She was born in Framingham, Massachusetts, a suburb of Boston. Joanne clarifies that when she was born, Framingham was rural, where today it is classified as a suburb.

Joanne is a lifelong Boston Red Sox fan, going to as many games as her schedule will allow. She can be seen at any given time wearing something baseball related. Her dress for the conference dinner was made from swatches of material that were of every Major

League team logo.

When she is not in the ER where she is a nurse, or out on call as a paramedic,

Joanne embraces all things baseball. She is not only familiar with the current game, she follows it closely. Baseball is the epicenter from which all of Joanne’s research extends, whether it is 19th century poetry or literature, baseball serves as the foundation. Joanne also has a penchant for town histories and the role baseball has played in each town she researches.

Joanne is outgoing and personable. She has a delightful exuberance when she is engaged. This is clearly evident in dialogues with Joanne whether it is within the structure of an academic study interview or casual conversation. Joanne is diminutive in stature; however, her voice, enthusiasm, and mannerisms tend to make one forget her lack of physical presence. She speaks with a frenetic zeal that reveals her unbridled zest for life. Her behavior is a quick reminder not to take oneself too seriously. She is self- effacing and her candor is refreshing. Joanne’s leadership traits fall into those of

Stogdill’s (1974) and Kirkpatrick and Locke’s (1991) in Table 2. Like Joe, they make

Joanne more of an authentic or transformational leader according to Northouse (2010).

Tom Shieber. Tom is the lone group interview participant member who is employed in the field of baseball research; however, his educational background in physics and employment his in the astronomy field provide an unusual contrast to the allure of baseball research, particularly that of the 19th century baseball history. Tom’s baseball history knowledge is broader than the other interview participants for obvious reasons. When one is employed at the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, assigned tasks can encompass a variety of historical periods. Tom finds 19th century baseball history his preferred area of research because, “it’s all about the research.

Personal experience doesn’t really help you so much when it comes to the 19th century.

Nobody can one up you on that. And I like that level playing field.”

Nothing about Tom’s stature or mode of attire is notable aside from his corrective lenses, which upon closer scrutiny are thicker than one is used to seeing. Tom impressed the researcher with the quality of being able to do many things extraordinarily well, although never hearing this from Tom. Tom lets his work do the talking for him. Tom is the type of person you want to engage in conversation. His kindness and compassion for all matter of things is clearly evident. One gets the impression that Tom is truly interested in whatever you have to say. His attention never wavers when engaged.

Tom dresses as if he is off to lecture in a college classroom, not dig through mountains of archives attempting to unearth a small piece of lost history. Tom is relatively soft spoken, but excited at the same time. He too, laughs quickly and often.

Tom has a predilection for explaining something with a relatable story; much like a Will

Rogers of baseball history. Tom takes his work, and this study, very seriously, but making sure he makes it fun for himself and others. He is emphatic about his love for the game of baseball including the current form. In fact, he attends “not enough” Major

League games.

Tom is well respected by the entire 19th century baseball history group. Tom, being a past keynote speaker at the conference luncheon, attests to that. Tom has the type of personality that is adaptable to all environments. He seems comfortable and at ease conversing on a variety of topics. His leadership traits fall firmly in the Zaccaro et al.

(2004) column in Table 2, without one clear leadership theory to define him.

Eric Miklich. Eric is the only interview group participant that currently engages in the playing of 19th century baseball. This playing of the game by 19th century rules is what led him to research 19th century baseball history. His appearance is meticulous.

Eric is also the only participant who wore a tie to the interview. This occurred because he was giving a presentation at the conference later that day; however, this same fastidiousness to fashion applied to his casual attire that he wore to other conference gatherings. Eric also is the only interviewee who has a sports participation background.

Eric is emphatic in his convictions and authoritative in his delivery of said principles and opinions. He is resolute in what he believes to be true. Eric addresses each issue with a seriousness that permeates the task at hand, yet there are moments of lightheartedness that reveals he is still a kid at heart.

Eric was born and currently resides on Long Island, New York. He was born in

Mineola, but grew up in Hempstead, both on Long Island where many towns are still referred to as villages. To the layman, all of Long Island could be construed as a suburb of New York City, but to Long Islanders,’ each town is its own suburb with its own uniqueness and different New York City influence.

Besides engaging in the play of 19th century baseball, Eric formally played softball and currently plays in a men’s hockey league. He has maintained his athletic physique well into his forties. The sport of hockey is Eric’s “first love.” Like Bob, he finds the current game too slow, and it is not cost effective for him to justify attending games. He would much rather take his daughter to see a Minor League game since there are several teams that play on Long Island. Eric contends that the pace of Minor League games is much faster than that of Major League games.

Eric is polite and serious when the situation calls for his demeanor to be so. He too has a frenetic delivery of speech when he is excited about the information he is sharing. It is during these frenetic moments that his sense of humor is at its best. His leadership traits are as varied as the theorists listed in Table 2. His business background and leadership capabilities suggests that a theoretical combination of the leadership styles and situational approaches to leadership apply to his characteristics.

Leadership characteristics have been added to the profiles of the interview participants. After having attended five consecutive years of the 19th century baseball history conference with the group members, as well as having conducted a previous field study, it was determined that the remaining 12 members of the study group who were not interviewed, possess many of the same leadership characteristics, in addition to the shared learning characteristics. This was confirmed by having conducted extensive observations in a variety of settings, and under varied circumstances. The field notes also indicate that many of the other SABR members who are not included in the study group, but attended the conference, also possess the very same leadership characteristics. This perspective is examined further later on in this study.

Data Collection

The researcher confirmed the participant interviews via email prior to arriving at the conference. A schedule was set for dates and times; however, two adjustments had to be made. Due to a work related meeting that Tom Shieber was required to attend, his interview took place in a private research room of the National Baseball Hall of Fame library. Joe Mancuso’s interview took place in the evening, the only interview that did not take place between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. Aside from those two

minor details, all interviews were conducted at approximately the same time and at the same locale. All but Tom, were offered breakfast or a snack, all politely refused.

The owners of the Cooperstown Bed & Breakfast were made aware of the importance of these interviews, and made the necessary arrangements with other guests to ensure quiet with no disruptions. Two recording devices were used in the event either device was rendered inoperable or an interview was mistakenly erased. Notes were taken throughout each interview to serve as confirmation and highlight important points noted by the participants.

Each interview, as well as the field notes, were reviewed for key indicators exhibiting their importance in the areas of adult, self-directed, and lifelong learning. In addition, answers to the interview questions gave insight into the leadership qualities group members possessed. Once the data gathering was complete, all the interviews were transcribed, paying particular attention to subtleties such as laughter, pauses for reflection, voice modulation, and which words were punched, meaning words delivered with emphasis.

Table 5 includes the eight words that appeared most often throughout each interview including the frequency per participant. Not all participants used all eight words. For example, not all participants used the word “passion,” but did use a synonym of “passion.” These words are relevant to each of the fields of learning; self-directed, lifelong, and adult. These words have been taken in context so as not to be confused with the same words that are included in the interview questions. All forms of these words are taken into consideration. This was the first step in coding: This was the open coding phase.

Table 5

Learning Characteristic Identifiers Obtained from Interviews

Joe Richard Bob Joanne Tom Eric Total

Baseball 56 37 41 57 70 58 319

Group 13 8 9 21 11 9 71

History 15 25 6 21 10 21 98

Interest 26 14 8 17 22 23 110

Learning 39 1 6 9 27 11 93

Passion* 16 6 5 6 13 8 54

Research 14 1 3 12 33 22 85

Share 7 2 3 22 6 1 41

Note. *Denotes a level of “interest.” Other words were used that warrant further examination.

These words were then situated on a magnetic board that contained the three learning areas as signified by color. Blue for adult learning, green for lifelong learning, and red for self-directed learning. Each interviewee had their own magnetic tag, and these were set horizontally in a row. Another row was added which included the research question, and the sub-questions. The questions appear in the same order that they appear in the interview protocol to prevent confusion. The interview questions corresponded with the research questions to remove speculation into how the answers would be interpreted, provide clarity, and minimize the margin for error, thus adding validity and credibility to the findings. By paying particular attention to the words from Table 5 that correspond with adult learning characteristics, lifelong learning characteristics, and self- directed learning characteristics, themes emerged.

Overview of Findings

To garner more insight, as well as get specificity regarding the research question and the sub-questions, the interview questions with the study participants are worded similarly. In order to gain an understanding into the motivations of these group members in their research of 19th century baseball history, their experiences are revealed. From the answers the participants gave regarding their experiences and/or motivations for researching 19th century baseball history, three central themes became apparent; (1) learning is fun, (2) baseball is the “hook” on which to hang many other aspects of history, and (3) the sense of belonging to a group of interesting people with similar interests is important to them.

Joe Mancuso originally joined SABR to spend more time with his father, Peter, who organizes and directs each Frederick Ivor-Campbell 19th Century Baseball History

Conference. His motivations now include a new appreciation for 19th century baseball history, those who research the subject, and the passion they have for this endeavor.

“Every step I took in the organization, I was like, WOW! This is amazing,” Joe stated with unbridled enthusiasm. He even chuckled at the very thought. Joe added:

The breadth of stuff people study, and the passion with which they do it and

present it, the amount of work that’s been done, and continues to be done, and the

amazing variety of people…it’s gotten me hooked almost more on the

organization than on the research.

Before a probe is asked, Joe adds, “I can honestly say, this year particularly…a lot of what motivates me is the people.”

Bob Tholkes agreed. When asked what Bob felt were the experiences of the members of the selected SABR group to continue their own research in this area of study, after a moments pause, Bob replied that one experience is being part of this particular group (historians of 19th century baseball history). He feels an obligation to the group to

“keeping up my end” in terms of research. He feels that he had the “means, opportunities, and prior background” to contribute. This prior background and being a self-described “bookworm” with an interest in baseball made him “naturally [get] into baseball history.” Bob continues to explain how his interest in baseball history grew, though his physical capabilities limited him from playing the game at a high level, and his interest never waned. He read baseball biographies and then moved on to other aspects of baseball history. By the time he finished his doctorate in education he

“acquired a level of confidence, a suitable level of competence in writing and analysis.

All the groundwork necessary for pursuing this type of research.”

Bob’s answers are matter-of-fact, to be taken as the normal progression of interest and skill level required for research in a specialized field. It is his interest in baseball that sets his research apart from other areas of study—the hook, so to speak. Bob was queried about what motivates him now to continue his research, and his answer reverted back to

“being part of the group.” Bob continued: “Rather than anything intrinsic to the baseball itself, I think it’s just being part of the congenial group.”

Joanne Hulbert concurred with several of Bob’s observations. Joanne believes

19th century baseball history to be the hook in which “it lends itself to study other areas

[of history].” She asserted that this is one of the appeals of her research. Joanne stated that she sees social history, women’s rights, politics, race, literature, and poetry “through

the lens of baseball” when researching 19th century baseball history. Her research allows for her to see what life was like in the 19th century. Joanne cited a poem where a young woman is attending her first baseball game with her beau. As he explains the game, she dreams of the day where she is playing rather than watching.

Joanne believes her research is “good exercise for her brain.” She feels joy and a sense of accomplishment with what she uncovers, and then is able to share that with others. Much like Bob and Joe, Joanne gets excited about the sense of community derived from being able to share, “holding up her end” as a manner of speaking. “It’s excellent for social interaction with others with similar interests.”

Richard Hershberger finds his research to be an outlet for combining his interest in history and his interest in baseball. The appeal of studying 19th century baseball history allows him to pursue research in two fields in an academic way without being an academic. “I’ve always had academic leanings. I very seriously considered doing postgraduate work in history;” however, Richard believes he would have been directed to an area of historical research that he would not find appealing. He feels that his research in

19th century baseball history is a “quasi-academic outlet.”

Eric Miklich found his research niche not through his interest in research, but through his interest in playing the game of baseball; however, Eric’s interest in the modern version of the game waned. An advertisement in Newsday in 1983 touted that a game of “Olde Tyme Baseball” was going to be played near Eric’s residence. Eric loved what he saw and decided that this would be the version of baseball that he would enjoy playing. It wasn’t until May of 1998 that Eric started to play 19th century-rules baseball.

Two years later, Eric was running a “vintage baseball” program. Bob Tholkes also has

played vintage baseball, but Bob’s 19th century baseball research had already begun.

Eric did not begin his research until he began playing.

What Eric took note of when playing these vintage baseball exhibitions was that spectators knew little or nothing about this precursor to the modern game that’s played today. Eric found much of what the spectators thought they knew about 19th century baseball was incorrect. He then set about to “correct” the myths that had been perpetuated. This would require research. What Eric found enlightened him as well as delighted him. He found that the ballplayers of the 19th century were truly interesting characters, worthy of their stories to be shared with those spectators who would gather for exhibitions conducted at fairs and town events. Thus, Eric would hold impromptu lectures for those spectators who were interested in the rules, 19th century ballplayers, and the evolution of the game. Eric believes that much of the American public thinks that baseball began with George Herman “Babe” Ruth, the famed pitcher and outfielder for first the Red Sox and then the Yankees. The origins of the game of baseball are currently being researched by a committee charged by former Major League Baseball

Commissioner, Bud Selig. The committee is comprised of SABR members who regularly attend the 19th century baseball history conference. Their research is ongoing.

The origins of baseball as alluded to by Eric, is a game began well before the mythical

Abner Doubleday invention of 1839. Eric thinks this lack of knowledge of baseball’s past “is a shame because there is so much history…” Eric believes that the historians of

19th century baseball are “righting wrongs.” By playing vintage baseball all over the country, it gives Eric the opportunity to engage in an activity he loves while educating the public about “America’s Game” (Rader, 2002).

Eric lamented that the “general public will never enjoy what research we do. Not only to find out new things, but to correct some of the older myths that are out there about 19th century baseball.” Much like the teams that played in the 19th century, Eric

“barnstorms” (travels to play teams from other towns). “For them [teams of 19th century] it was more for monetary purposes, for us…we spread it” [the history of 19th century baseball].

Tom Shieber’s short reply, the lone study participant whose employment focuses on baseball history, when asked about his experiences leading him to do research in the area of 19th century baseball history, speaks volumes. It is a sentiment expressed in other terms by each study participant, and many others not formally interviewed, but willing to share with the researcher as to what motivates them to do research in this particular field of 19th century baseball history. Tom replied, “Well, I find it fun. I like doing fun things” (see Appendix E). In a conversation Tom had at another SABR conference many years earlier with an older, more accomplished SABR member, Tom was asked by this gentleman what era did he conducted his research in. Tom’s answer was 19th century, pre-Civil War, to be specific.

Tom was queried as to why a young man like himself would research a period so far back, and Tom replied, “One of the nice things about doing 19th century baseball research is there is no advantage. There’s no one out there who can say they were there.

It’s a level playing field.” Tom explained that there are a lot of great researchers who investigate what they have witnessed, as far back as the 1940s, but personal experience really can’t help one when he/she researches 19th century baseball.

The joy Tom gets from doing his research is clear, “You better enjoy the means and not the ends. I love doing it. If it comes out what I find is interesting, that it’s worth sharing with other people…that’s icing on the cake.” Tom added “It’s all about doing it

[the research]. Doing it is what’s most important. It’s fun.” This joy in the “doing” is a cornerstone characteristic shared by this SABR group according to the study participants.

Joe Mancuso speaks of the passion for baseball research that the group members exude. His primary passion is music, but he recognizes the same passion in group members concerning their field of study. “To recognize that [passion] when they’re doing something they are passionate about is really cool,” Joe stated. Joe considers himself “sort of an outlier with the group” due to his limited understanding of 19th century baseball history; however, this limited understanding matters little to the group.

Joe does believe that he has the same shared “appreciation for history, particularly the history of baseball, and how some of these tiny little things we learn about the past can be very interesting and very relevant…and they can bring people closer together,” he stated, referring to the group members.

Bob Tholkes also used the term, passion, when describing the shared characteristics of the group. Bob feels that group members share:

similar backgrounds, similar life experiences to my own. Early interests to the

same thing with the added unique element of including baseball in those life

experiences. Why baseball would be included or become a passion for them, I

couldn’t speak for. I’m not even sure how it became mine after all these years, he said with a grin.

Eric takes the passion aspect one step further. Eric believes a unique group characteristic is obsessiveness about baseball history. “Where will you find a group of 55 people that are OCD [obsessive compulsive disorder], put them in one place. I mean how often does that happen?” Eric finds it is only with the subject of 19th century baseball history; his reason, “Because it is so interesting.” Eric also believes that approximately

80% of the group members “look for the oddities,” something that no one else has researched before, the uniqueness of what transpired in 19th century baseball.

When posed with the question of shared characteristics of the group, Richard, while not going so far as to say the group members are afflicted with OCD, he feels that

“we’re all history geeks. And we are all baseball geeks.” He posited that what sets the group apart from other SABR members “is this interest in the earlier period. Because most people, including SABR, when they talk about history, they mean Ty Cobb and whoever their Dad told them about when they were kids.” Richard believes this characteristic is beneficial for “more understanding of baseball and the social context.

Which is far more interesting than hero stories.” Hero stories refer to the stories told about the great ballplayers or teams of any particular era, especially from the modern era

(post-1900).

Like the rest of the study participants, Joanne believes a shared characteristic is

“the thrill of the search for little tiny bits of information.” She thinks this willingness to search for the unique is reflected in the group members’ “enthusiasm for knowledge.”

Joanne stated, “I’ve been struck by so many people who have taken one tiny bit of baseball history, and would spend their lifetime pursuing it.” Further, Tom stated the shared characteristic thusly, “People (group members) really enjoy the process. Like

anything, when people get together with a common interest, often camaraderie comes from that.”

When asked what the unique characteristics of the group members are, the response range is extreme. Tom Shieber believes there are no unique characteristics among the group members save their research “niche” and common interest in that area of research. Tom doesn’t see any reason that a group of historians of 19th century baseball would be “any different than a group of people that have an interest in…medieval tapestries or something like that.” Tom laughed when he realizes that a medieval tapestry group probable does exist somewhere. The researcher, to illustrate a unique characteristic, relates to Tom that Eric noted that several members of the study group do not own cellphones. Tom responded, “I wouldn’t be surprised if that was true of the medieval tapestry group as well.” Joe Mancuso feels that there are “a lot” of unique characteristics, basing his answer on the characteristics that are “less common” among the general population. Since Joe is admittedly a relative novice to the world of

19th century baseball history research, he is able to see things group members immersed in the realm of 19th century baseball history may view as commonplace.

Richard spoke of being a “history geek,” a “math geek,” and a “baseball geek” in a very matter-of-fact sort of way. Joe, on the other hand, finds group member’s willingness to openly “geek-out” a unique characteristic. Joe explained what he means:

“In this community, in this family again, as I almost want to call it, I feel people can be completely unabashedly geeks about this thing they are passionate about.” Joe believes the general population would be unable to relate or understand what group members are talking about. “Yet, someone (a group member attending the conference) will come up

and make some obscure comment or correct some tiny fact, and that’s not weird here”

Joe observed. Joe is also intrigued by his observation of group members “geeking-out” within the realm of 19th century baseball history, as if being a 19th century baseball history geek were not unique enough. Joe used Richard Hershberger as an example, not knowing Richard was an interview participant.

Joe explained his understanding of Richard’s area of expertise: “Richard

Hershberger is a guy, like once you get to 1880, he’s bored. When he [Richard] talks about early baseball, he’s talking about early baseball! He’s talking about things in the

1830s, 40s, 50s, and 60s.” Richard was told of this response during his interview. He stated:

He [Joe] almost quoted me. What I tell people is that I have a self-imposed cutoff

date of, it’s a soft cutoff date, but it’s approximately 1885. The reason for having

a cutoff date is, I would rather have a depth of knowledge in a smaller area, than a

shallower knowledge in a broader area.

This approach is not unlike academics who specialize in a particular field. A history scholar may focus on the 19th century, and within the 19th century may narrow the scope to the Civil War, and then narrow the focus further to General Grant during the

Civil War. Many of the study group members take this same approach to 19th century baseball history.

Bob Tholkes’ perception of a shared characteristic segues into a unique characteristic of the group members. Bob feels that the shared characteristic is “certainly the love of learning. But why pick baseball? That’s the unusual, if not the unique

characteristic of the group at the core, that they’re centered on baseball than any other particular form of learning. Branch of learning.”

Joanne Hulbert is adamant in her assessment of the shared characteristic of the study group, but her observations of the unique characteristics of the group are less clear.

Joanne believes that the shared characteristic is the generosity in sharing freely the research that group members have done. She stated:

There is a satisfaction in sharing that [research] information. This information is

to be shared, not owned. Nobody has a copyright on history. We’re digging in

the same dump. That’s what it is, a lot of flotsam being thrown aside for the

greater good.

This sense of community which envelopes the group is a shared characteristic with adult learners of other subject matter either vocational or avocational (Delahaye & Erlich,

2008; Kolb, 1976).

Self-directed Learning

The definition for self-directed learning has been established as “adults assuming control of their learning” (Merriam & Brockett, 1997, p. 156). This study does not employ the self-directed learning readiness scale (SDLRS) as posited by Guglielmino in

1977. However, there are certain characteristics as listed by Guglielmino in determining self-directed learning. These characteristics are:

1. One who exhibits initiative, independence, and persistence in learning.

2. One who accepts responsibility for his/her own learning and views problems as

challenges, not as obstacles.

3. One who is capable of self-direction and who has a high degree of curiosity.

4. One who has a strong desire to learn or change and is self-confident.

5. One who is able to use basic study skills, organize his/her time, set an appropriate

pace for learning, and to develop a plan for completing work.

6. One who enjoys learning and has a tendency to be goal oriented.

Within the transcripts of each study participant interview, as well as the conversations the researcher had with other group members at the conference, it was determined that the group members possessed these characteristics to varying degrees.

By the very nature of mastering an area of learning outside the group member’s chosen profession to the level of producing seminal work in the field, satisfies each characteristic listed here. Specific responses during interviews reinforce these characteristics being evident in, not only the interview subjects, but also in each group member.

Joe Mancuso believes he is not “a baseball guy, but I could be.” Joe feels that he has to “figure out how to learn independently.” This was a revelation to Joe. He needed to find out how he learns best in order to be able to learn at all. Joe describes the group members’ abilities to do research thusly:

these people who are going out in a self-directed way, who are diving into

impossible piles of hard to find, obscure information…they have the skills to hunt

down these little gems…to me, that is a huge characteristic of an adult learner.

What is intriguing is Joe’s use of the term “self-directed.” He uses the term in the correct context, without any familiarity with education terminology, although the phrase did not come up in the interview. Joe described the self-directed learner without any knowledge of the scholarly work done in the field of self-directed learning.

To further express this characteristic, Eric Miklich exhibits self-directedness on several levels. Eric doggedly pursued his interest in participating in 19th century baseball for 19 years before being able to do so. His interest became so great, he “ran the program

[19th century baseball] two years later.” As can be imagined, the equipment used to play baseball in the 19th century is decidedly different from the equipment used today. The equipment was very difficult to find, and quite pricey. Eric remedied that by learning how to construct the regulation balls used for games to the exact specifications of those used in the 19th century. The process was time consuming and tedious work. In fact,

Eric has become so proficient that he has formed a small company that produces all of the baseballs to use in games for the 19th century vintage baseball teams across the U.S.

From Eric’s interest in 19th century baseball history a cottage industry that produces revenue has emerged. His self-directedness has led him down many roads of 19th century baseball. He is an accomplished researcher, published author, and 19th century baseball manufacturer. All of this stems from a banker’s [Eric’s occupation] interest in playing baseball by 19th century rules.

Bob Tholkes also plays “vintage baseball,” just not as often as Eric. Bob embodies the self-directed learner. He has earned a doctorate in educational administration (budgeting and finance). Bob was a teacher in Australia before becoming a corporate trainer for Target. During the course of the interview the researcher inadvertently referenced Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs, which serves as a foundation for the premise of this study. Bob quipped in a playful way that, “Maybe you shouldn’t have [brought up Maslow], now I’ll be honing my answers,” as Bob and the researcher laughed. Bob’s understanding of the study, his educational background, and

the lighthearted manner in which he responded, indicated that Bob would not let this inadvertent lapse affect his responses. That said, Bob feels that the idea of self- fulfillment is a shared characteristic of group members. When asked about other shared characteristics of the group, Bob feels that “self-directed learners” is “a good way to put it [a shared characteristic].”

A colleague who assisted with validating the coding of the transcripts revealed that each interview participant was disciplined. Tom Shieber is so disciplined and persistent in his self-directedness that he took a childhood research project of finding out about the names on a found baseball, and left the field of astronomy for the field of 19th century baseball history at the National Baseball Hall of Fame.

Joanne Hulbert did not call baseball the hook which serves as the impetus for her interest in 19th century baseball; however, baseball does serve as the hook for her when it comes to all things 19th century. Joanne’s baseball research has led her to extensively research 19th century women’s rights, poetry, and literature. This curiosity, perseverance, and a joy for learning is evidence that supports the self-directed learner characteristics of which she possesses.

Clearly, the interview participants exhibit each of the characteristics of a self- directed learner. In addition, the participants feel that other group members share these characteristics as perceived through their answers to the shared characteristics of group members question. The interview participants were never queried about self-directed learning, yet each display the six characteristics of self-directed learners as listed by

Guglielmino (1977).

All adult learners are not necessarily self-directed learners. There are adult learners who have to be directed in their learning. An example would be employees who are required to attend various seminars and conferences for training purposes, or to enhance or advance their careers or where monetary compensation is the motivation.

There are also adult learners who enroll in a formal learning environment where the academic terminology defines them as non-traditional students. These students are either goal oriented [toward graduating], or are there for their own edification [to increase their knowledge in a chosen area of interest]. The latter adult learner could be considered self-directed. The historians of 19th century baseball group members in the study are definitively self-directed learners based on the criteria set forth by Guglielmino (1977), but they are also all adult learners.

Relevance

How the researching of 19th century baseball history is relevant to the 21st century can best be summarized by Joanne Hulbert’s response: “Because it explores origins.” She does not mean just the origins of baseball. “What did people do for recreation?” in the 19th century, “This is the fun part of digging…that we are able to refute claims…righting the wrongs.” As with the other interview participants, Joanne feels that, “You must know the history before you can know where it’s [any subject] currently.” Joanne contended that:

19th century baseball does give some good clues about what life in America was

like at the time. I like the fact that it [baseball] has all those tentacles that get

into…economics, labor relations, race relations, not just Blacks, but other

minorities as well.

She cited an example of the teams from her town that were not integrated, and by integrated, she means Irish, until the 1880s. Joanne has previously discussed the topic of women’s rights in the 19th century as seen through the lens of baseball; baseball serving as the hook, for giving her an understanding of other issues.

Tom Shieber concurred with Joanne’s assessment: “I’m a believer that the more you learn about the past, the better you can understand the past, and the present, and ultimately the future.” Tom pauses for a moment before continuing, deep in thought.

“Let me put it to you this way. When I research and learn more about baseball history, I better understand all of baseball.”

Bob Tholkes and Richard Hershberger are not as sure of the relevance of 19th century baseball history to the 21st century. Bob is unsure if it is relevant at all: “Not after relevance to anything contemporary, aside from baseball.” It is the “digging” that motivates all interview participants. “It’s fun to dig into the roots of the rules…digging into those roots is fascinating for me,” Bob said. Bob feels he is more of a compiler rather than a true historian. Bob believes that, “True historians synthesize what they find into…more general theories and conclusions.” For Bob, “It’s discovery more than history.”

Richard, too, is suspect of the relevance: “Why is history ever relevant to the 21st century?” he responded with a hearty laugh. Richard stated: “Honestly, this is personal fulfillment. I’m not doing it because it is relevant.” Richard gave more clarity to what he means: “I think my interests have brought it [baseball] into cultural history as that relates to baseball. So that is no more, no less relevant than cultural history ever is.” Richard

speaks of the plight of Blacks, women, and the federal government, again as seen through the lens of baseball.

Eric Miklich was adamant in his judgment: “It’s only relevant to the people who research it. Us. It’s not relevant to the general public. Eric spoke of the lack of interest the general public has for 19th century baseball history. He used the patrons of the

National Baseball Hall of Fame as an example. He claimed that people “run right through” the 19th century exhibit.

Eric believes that as baseball is packaged today in the media, historical context is not consumable. He believes that “it is too much effort” for the general public to see the correlation between what occurred in the 19th century and today. When posed with the contention of David Krell (and others)—a SABR member who attended the conference, but did not qualify to be an interview participant—that, “In order to know where we are going, we have to know where we’ve been.” Eric responded after some thought: “In relationship to what we do, we’re the only ones who know where we’ve been.” Yet, Eric has created a cottage industry manufacturing 19th century baseballs to exact specifications for use by the dozens of teams that play “Olde Tyme Baseball” (19th century rules). This would show a definite relevance to the 21st century. Eric’s response warrants further study into the understanding of the relationship and relevancy between

19th century baseball history and its place in the 21st century.

As an admitted newcomer to the field of 19th century baseball historical research,

Joe Mancuso finds the relevance itself as his hook. “I think there are several answers there. I want to start with the more concrete, then I’ll wax philosophical after that,” Joe shared through his laughter. “When you talk baseball history, there is the baseball aspect,

and then there is the history aspect,” Joe declared. Joe feels that, “Knowing more about where the game comes from increases an appreciation of the game as it is today.” Joe reinforced what has been posited in various forms by other group participants. He cited the transformation in the salary structure. He acknowledged that players of the 19th century had to take jobs in the off season, rather than the players today being able to hone their skills year-round due to the amount they are getting paid that allows them to do so.

Joe stated that, “The study of history is important to appreciating where we [society] are today. Not only with relevance to sports, but with everything.” Joe summed up his belief thusly: “We live for the beauty of this world past, present, and future. Here are some people bringing something specific and not very well known to life in this century.

Awesome.”

Adult Learners

The average age of a SABR member is “around 59” years according to Joanne

Hulbert who cited Jacob Pomrenke, SABR’s director of editorial content. The average age of the study group members, as well as the interview participants, was a little less based on those who did reveal their age over the course of the conference period. The mean age would alone characterize the study group as adult learners. According to

Knowles, Holton, and Swanson (1998), “The andragogical model of adult learning makes some fundamentally different assumptions about what motivates adults to learn” (p. 149).

Rather than being motivated by external reward (promotion, raise, etc.), internal reward is the prime motivator. Wlodkowski (1985) suggested that there are four characteristics of adult learners seeking internal reward:

1. Success: adults want to be successful learners.

2. Volition: adults want to feel a sense of choice in their learning.

3. Value: adults want to learn something they value.

4. Enjoyment: adults want to experience the learning as pleasurable.

Several of the characteristics of self-directed learners are shared by adult learners in general as Figure 3 below indicates. This figure gives a clearer understanding of the characteristics that this group of learners exhibits.

Self-Directed Learners Iniave Adult Learners Persistence Want to learn Independent something they Curious value

Enjoyment Volion Disciplined Goal Oriented/ Success

Figure 3. Overlapping characteristics of adult, self-directed learners.

The study group and interview participants all exhibit each of these characteristics. The self-directed learner characteristics are more specific. The characteristics of the adult learners are more general. The term volition incorporates several of the aspects found in the list of self-directed learning characteristics. What is listed above are the characteristics unique to the self-directed learner and the adult learner, as well as those characteristics shared by members of both groups. The interview participants’ responses to questions makes it clear as to what motivates them to learn.

Joanne asserted that an adult learner characteristic shared by all study group members is “discipline in research. The sharing freely of knowledge and ideas…learning for the first time new ways we teach ourselves.” This assertion contains aspects of both self-directed learning and the adult learner.

Tom believes that, as researchers, most of the members of the study group realize that “there’s no money to be made in doing 19th century baseball research…you really have to be doing it pretty much for altruistic reasons.” Tom elaborated. “I would say every one of us have that love of learning. There’s no need to compete,” he said in a voice that denotes that his assumption makes sense. Tom likes making sure that, “people think, oh that’s fun!” (the entertainment value of what he does). Tom continued, “That to me is the best. When an outside person who’s not necessarily interested in 19th century baseball goes, ‘ooo…that’s kinda neat.’” Tom reflected on the attitudes of the study group members: “While I’d love for someone in our group to also think about that [the

“fun” aspect],” Tom is less interested in the fun aspect when talking to other study group members. Tom would rather the group understand that “what I do [his own research] furthers their abilities to research, and their abilities to learn.”

Academic Worthiness of Baseball History

Tom Shieber epitomizes the self-directed, adult learner. He enjoys the process of doing 19th century baseball research. Tom wants to be successful in his learning, which is why his primary area of baseball research is the 19th century, even though his employment requires him to research other historic baseball periods. As previously stated, Tom believes that other researchers have an advantage because they lived in and witnessed certain decades or eras. This is not true of the 19th century. Tom has chosen

this field (historic baseball research) as his field of employment after many years in the astronomy field that his physics degree prepared him for. Lastly, Tom values baseball and its history as an integral part of American culture.

Tom lamented that he had “no interest in history…even up through college;” however, baseball proved to be the hook that piqued Tom’s interest in history. “I realized to better understand baseball history, I had to understand general history,” he stated.

From the viewpoint of Tom Shieber, the learning characteristics he exhibits, and the value derived on many levels from researching 19th century baseball history, one can see that there is impetus toward the academic worthiness of the field. Yet, there is a caveat.

Tom also believes that while 19th century baseball history, and baseball history in general, is a field worthy of academic study, he also believes, if taking the “negative approach,” “why not?” Tom claimed: “I mean, I’m not sure what wouldn’t be worthy of academic study.” Tom used Tiddlywinks as an example. “Baseball is worthy because I feel it’s an important part of American culture,” Tom asserted. “The reason I can say that is because of this massive baseline of knowledge. Whereas Tiddlywinks doesn’t have that baseline; still worthy of research, but…it doesn’t have the oomph of baseball,” he asserted.

Tom turns his focus to 19th century baseball history: “From an academic study…you can actually learn about American culture and what is it about baseball that hooked Americans such that they all have a general knowledge of the game.” Joanne

Hulbert agreed stating, “I think it’s worthy just by the mere fact that it permeates, and enters into everything else [in 19th century American culture].” Bob Tholkes did not argue for 19th century baseball history being a field worthy of academic study, but

questions why other fields are worthy: “Who knows if it is? But you ask the same question of virtually every other field…why is it more worthy of study than baseball?”

Bob referenced baseball as the hook again. Baseball ties him to fond memories of his past, and it gives him an opportunity to be with people “that I share traits with.”

“Baseball is the hook all that hangs on” Bob concludes.

John Thorn, the official historian of Major League Baseball, was telling the researcher of an encounter with noted documentarian, Ken Burns. Thorn concurred with

Burns’ assessment of baseball history. Burns metaphorically referred to baseball history as a Trojan Horse. “You knock on the door selling history,” Thorn recalled, “everybody says ‘no thank you.’ If you tell them it’s baseball history, then they tell you to come on in.” When queried, all interview participants felt this analogy was accurate. Yet, Thorn feels that the researcher “was swimming against the tide” when told that one of the goals of this study was to bring baseball history into the realm of academia. Richard

Hershberger agrees with Thorn to a degree.

Richard believes that 19th century baseball history “is one of those rare areas where a guy like me can be doing original research.” When asked what exactly is “a guy like him?” Richard replied without hesitation: “Somebody with academic leanings who understands what academic rigor is, but who is not actually an academic.” Richard explained that his reasons for pursuing 19th century baseball history, as opposed to another area of history, reflect self-actualization and self-attainment. “I live in Civil War country [central Maryland]. What can somebody like me say about the Civil War that’s not been said?” he asked. The point Richard made is that a self-professed non-academic cannot find the self-satisfaction of doing original research in fields that so many

academics have already covered. 19th century baseball history’s academic focus

“originated with Harold Seymour’s doctoral dissertation” (The Rise of Major League

Baseball to 1891, completed in 1956 at Cornell University). Richard’s tone became somber when he asserted, “It is a subject that goes into academia, but it has been trod lightly by academia.”

Eric Miklich is keenly aware of the worth of 19th century baseball history, but remains skeptical, like Richard, as to whether it can make new inroads into the academic world. “Absolutely it should be,” Eric replied when posed with the question. “Yes. It’s the foundation for the entire sport…baseball is a big part of our culture,” he continued.

This is not to say that 19th century baseball history, or baseball history in general, is exclusive to American culture. The game plays an important role in other cultures around the world. Japan, Latin America, and several South American countries have woven baseball into the fabric of their cultures as well; however, Eric is concerned about the attraction of 19th century baseball history to the 21st century traditional student. The researcher suggested perhaps incorporating 19th century baseball history into another class that covers other aspects of 19th century American history. Eric believes that

“there’s certainly plenty of information on 19th century baseball to fill a semester.” Eric asked, “But would it hold someone’s attention for a semester? I don’t think so.” This thinking is not exclusive to this particular subject matter. When adding a course to any curriculum in higher education, maintaining student interest is a concern that is addressed. Eric conceded, “All baseball history, yes. 19th century only, no” as to baseball history’s place at the university level.

Joanne Hulbert argued that baseball history, 19th century included, is worthy of academic consideration for very similar reasons as to the relevance of why 19th century baseball history is relevant in the 21st century: “Just by the mere fact that it permeates into everything else.” Again, Joanne, as did the other study interview participants, revealed another example of baseball serving as the hook, this time regardless of what one’s interest in the 19th century may be. “If you have an interest in 19th century labor history, you’ll have to stumble into baseball. Even political issues, you’ll stumble into baseball,” Joanne cited referring to fields where baseball intersects with 19th century history. Joanne incorporates her research of 19th century women’s baseball into the struggle for women’s rights within the 19th century. “An article from the early 1900s asserted that women partaking in sports became ‘masculinized,’ it ruined their brains…because team sports like baseball made them [women] better thinkers and team players.” Joanne said that the article referred to women becoming empowered through sports, and that, “baseball was considered to be the main culprit.”

Joe Mancuso believes that by studying 19th century baseball history, it helps him—as well as other study group members—“to know the big picture…how it [19th century baseball history] fits in with the whole [of history].” Because Joe is now figuring out how he learns best, 19th century baseball history is the object of his learning experience. Hence, 19th century baseball history is his adult learning tool.

Joe truly appreciates the efforts of the study group members in their endeavors.

He admires their passion, and he feels the joy shared by the group of which he is a vital member. Joe feels that it is the “allure that is very easy to connect to something that is very popular and discussed relevant today…it [baseball history] has its reference point.”

He believes that 19th century baseball history is academically worthy as a field of study due to “…this thread, unbroken thread, that carries from the modern day, this huge part of our culture, that goes all the way back…to the first century of our nation.” Joe believes that baseball “is absolutely a cultural mainstay.” Joe described the thread thusly, “It’s not a huge leap to go from studying the Baltimore Orioles of today, to the Baltimore Orioles of Cal Ripken’s day.” Cal Ripken Jr. is noted for playing in 2,632 consecutive baseball games, breaking Lou Gehrig’s 2,130 consecutive game streak. Ripken’s career spanned

21 seasons from 1981 to 2001. Joe stated that you can then connect “to the Baltimore

Orioles of the early 20th century, to the Baltimore Orioles of the late 19th century.” Joe thinks that this thread makes “baseball in the 1880s…relevant in 1920, and it was relevant in 1950, and it’s relevant in 1990, and it’s relevant now.” Joe expounded on his thread theory of baseball in terms of other fields of study, much like Joanne did: “I think that the thread makes it [19th century baseball history] attractive to people who are interested in history, to people who are interested in sports.”

Demographics

The demographic data listed in Table 6 is consistent with the information gathered. The mean and median age of the interview participants is 53. Joanne Hulbert stated that, “the median age is around 59…many of them clustered 45 or older” of the members of the SABR. The study group members’ median age is also approximately 59.

The ancestry of the interview participants is diverse, but German extraction figures prominently. The participant’s places of birth are from all over the U.S. Most were raised in a suburban or rural environment. The same is true of the study group; several members were born abroad, and at least three were raised and currently live in Canada.

Table 6

Participant Demographics

Participant 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Tom Shieber 49 Russ.- St. Louis B Y B N Senior Curator Y/Y Pol. Hall of Fame

Joe Mancuso 40 Ital. Staten B Y C N Systems Y/Y Island Engineer

Bob Tholkes 65 Germ. Minn. B/C Y D N Retired Corp. N/N** Trainer

Richard 51 Germ. Cali. B/C Y B* N Paralegal Y/Y Hershberger

Joanne 66 Brit.- Mass. C Y B* Y EMT/ER Nurse Y/Y Hulbert Dutch

Eric Miklich 48 Swe.- Long B Y B Y Banking N/N Germ. Island Note. *Denotes some post graduate coursework. **Denotes attendance at games depends upon the companion. Key: 1. Age; 2. Ancestry; 3. Place of Birth; 4. Community Type raised - A. Urban, B. Suburban, C. Rural; 5. Baseball as a Youth Activity (Y or N); 6. Education Level - A. Associate, B. Baccalaureate, C. Master, D. Doctoral; 7. Played a Sport in High School or College (Y or N); 8. Current Occupation; 9. A. Fan of Today’s Baseball, B. Attend Games.

Baseball did serve as a youth activity, but most participants did not engage in a high school or college sport for a variety of reasons. The primary explanation given was lack of athletic ability. Joanne would have played baseball in high school had she been allowed: “I protested because I thought that there was gender bias. I played field hockey.” Joanne’s personal way of boycotting was to play field hockey rather than softball.

All interview participants are college graduates. The same is true of study group members save one, David Block, the author of the award-winning work Baseball Before

We Knew It (2005); thus far the most definitive and comprehensive research concerning

the origins of the game of baseball. Block dropped out of the University of Michigan in

1965. After serving in Vietnam, Block did not go back to school to complete his degree.

The current and/or former occupations of the interview participants, as well as those of the study group, are as diverse as the far-flung regions in which each were reared. Joe Mancuso would much rather earn his living as a musician, but his current occupation is as a systems engineer. Tom, the lone professional baseball history researcher among the interview participants, works at the National Baseball Hall of Fame as the senior curator. John Thorn, not an interview participant, but a member of the study group, also can claim his occupation as a baseball history researcher as he is the official historian for Major League Baseball. Joanne is an emergency room nurse. Eric works as a manager in the banking industry. Richard is a para-legal. Bob Tholkes is a retired corporate trainer for the Target Corporation. Bob also spent many years as a teacher.

Besides the interview participants’ interest in 19th century baseball history, some are quite fond of the current game as well. Joanne is a lifetime Boston Red Sox fan who frequently attends games at historic Fenway Park. Richard enjoys going to Major League games. Joe said he doesn’t get to go often enough: “I love going to ballgames!” Tom also lamented, “Not going [to games] often enough.” Eric and Bob are not big fans of the current game of baseball as it’s played at the Major League level. Eric will occasionally watch a local minor league game. Bob would go to more Major League games if there were more knowledgeable individuals with whom he could attend games. It should be noted that both Bob and Eric find the vintage game (19th century rules) enthralling. In fact, both men attend vintage games frequently. Eric plays the vintage game regularly.

These data indicate that it is not necessary to love all things baseball, regardless of era, to

have a love and passion concerning 19th century baseball history. The level of interest in the modern game varied among the members of the study group.

In terms of success concerning the worth of 19th century baseball history as a learning tool, particularly among adult learners, one needs to look no further than this conference. The conference has given an outlet for others of like interests to share the knowledge gained through their adult learning experiences. This is the true enjoyment for all of the interview participants. The choice of 19th century baseball history as their adult learning tool is reinforced by the fact that only two study group members are gainfully employed in the field of baseball research. Each member values others’ contributions in addition to their own research. No one individual or finding is any more important than the one who is quoted in the press, radio, television, or films. Each member’s work has equal value in the eyes of other members. After compiling and analyzing the collected data, the following table was constructed as a guide to the relation of the findings, the researcher’s interpretations, and the conclusions drawn.

Table 7

Summary of Study Findings, Interpretations, and Conclusions

Findings Interpretations Conclusions 1. Love of learning is a prime Circumstances dictate what Supports Kuhnert’s (1994) ideal of motivation for all 6 interview environment the learning learning for the greater good. Supports participants. occurs. Maslow’s (1943) final level of hierarchy The learning extends beyond of needs. The joy of discovery and 19th century baseball history subsequent sharing of what brings about for the majority of the the feeling of fulfillment provides the interview participants, and motivation for continuing to learn. the study group. A sense of fulfillment comes from learning and sharing what is learned. 2. Love of learning; being a A sense of belonging fuels Interview participants and those of the member of a group with those continued participation study group are self-directed learners who of similar interest, and a regardless of contribution. enjoy being members of a group who passion for baseball history There is a mutual respect for share the same passion for the subject are the primary shared each group member. matter. The characteristics are consistent characteristics of the with that of adult learners. A sense of “oneness” exists. interview participants and group members. 3. The majority of interview The group members believe Interview participants and group participants believe there are their characteristics are not members do not view doing extensive no tangible unique shared by people outside the research in a specialized field for little or characteristics of the group. group. no compensation as a unique Attention to detail (getting characteristic; yet, this shared group things right) is not viewed as characteristic alone makes the group itself unique. unique. Other specialized groups share characteristics pertaining to that particular group. Thus, the characteristics are not interpreted as unique. 4. Six of six interview Knowles’ (1975) six Each group member, save two, by the fact participants, as well as all principles of self-directed they are experts in the field of 19th group members, in most learners evident. century baseball history which is their cases exhibit all, or the All group members fit the avocation, supports all constructs which majority of, the definition of self-directed define self-directed learners. The characteristics of self-directed learners as posited by additional characteristic each interview learners as defined in the Brockett and Merriam participant and the majority of group literature. (2007). members possess is that of self-efficacy as posited by Bandura (1982). All self-directed learner characteristics as posited by Guglielmino (1977) are apparent in various forms. continues

Table 7 continued

Findings Interpretations Conclusions 5. The majority of interview A social and cultural relevance 19th century baseball history is as participants and group members exists through 19th century relevant in the 21st century as is believe, to varying degrees, that baseball history that makes it the 19th century history of any 19th century baseball history is relevant to the 21st century. other subject matter of a culture. relevant to the 21st century. An assimilation of ethnic groups For many of the study group, 19th and class is evident in 19th century baseball history allows for century baseball history. This the investigation of other aspects assimilation continues in the of American culture. 21st century. The existence of the conference where the study takes places supports the relevance of 19th century baseball history in the 21st century. 6. The majority of interview Baseball is so woven into the Baseball history commands the participants and group fabric of American, Latin, and scholarly attention given to other participants believe that baseball certain Asian cultures, that fields of research. Baseball is as history is the hook that allows for regardless of whether or not one much worthy of academic the examination of other forms of has participated in the game, a research as art or theater due to history. keen interest can develop to the how engrained it is in cultures. point of producing scholarly research. Baseball history is a lens that other aspects of historical research can be conducted where otherwise interest could wane. Knowledge of baseball and its history is multi-generational, regardless of interest level. 7. Six of six interview participants The learning environment does All but one group member have a and members of the study group not play a role in the learning. formal education; however, all possess and exhibited the A quintessential love for levels of Bloom et al.’s (1956) characteristics of successful adult learning (learning for learning’s taxonomy have been achieved. learners as posited by Brookfield sake) exists for each group Learning is no longer part of the (1984), Merriam et al. (2007), member. process, but the process itself Brockett & Hiemstra (1991), and from which the group members Though most research is done on Tough (1971). achieve satisfaction. an independent basis, a sense of belonging to the group is also a motivational aspect of each member’s learning experience.

continues

Table 7 continued

Findings Interpretations Conclusions 8. Six of six interview Through observations it is All group members are disciplined, intelligent, participants and group clear that some members motivated, and possess high levels of drive and members possess were thrust into leadership determination, in addition to other leadership certain leadership roles, while others lead by characteristics. The group members are in total characteristics. example. cooperation with one another toward the greater Some leadership good of the group members and their respective characteristics are obvious research. It is to be noted that some members through observed behavior. possess additional leadership characteristics, such as charisma, dominance, sociability, and openness, No one singular member of among others traits associated with leadership. the group is any more the leader of the group than another, though some serve/served in leadership capacities in their chosen vocations.

The following chapter offers the conclusions garnered from the data analysis, in addition to recommendations for further study.

V. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS

The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore and describe the experiences of a group of adult learners who produce the seminal work in the field of

19th century baseball history as an avocation. The intent of this examination was to answer the primary research question: What are the experiences of historians of 19th century baseball who produce the seminal work in the field as an avocation? However, other sub-questions were explored with the Society for American Baseball Research

(SABR) members that to helped yield maximum insight.

During data analysis related to the primary research question, three central themes emerged from participant interviews:

• Learning is fun.

• Baseball is the “hook” on which to hang many other aspects of history.

• The sense of belonging to a group of interesting people with similar interests is

important to them (interview participants, as well as those whose personal

communications with the researcher, were noted).

Findings

Further in-depth analysis using observations, document review, field notes, as well as the participant interviews, led to the findings. The findings for the sub-questions are listed below.

Addressing sub-research question 1: Do the selected members of the SABR group exhibit traits and characteristics that can be considered those of self-directed learners based on the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) criteria (Guglielmino,

1977)? These characteristics are:

• One who exhibits initiative, independence, and persistence in learning.

• One who accepts responsibility for his/her own learning and views problems as

challenges, not as obstacles.

• One who is capable of self-direction and who has a high degree of curiosity.

• One who has a strong desire to learn or change and is self-confident.

• One who is able to use basic study skills, organize his/her time, set an appropriate

pace for learning, and to develop a plan for completing work.

• One who enjoys learning and has a tendency to be goal oriented.

In Table 7, the finding is: six of six interview participants, and SABR study group members, in most cases, exhibited the majority of, the characteristics of self-directed learners as defined in the literature.

Addressing sub-research question 2: What established theorized characteristics of adult learners are shared by this particular group? In Table 7, the finding is: six of six interview participants, and SABR study group members possessed and exhibited the characteristics of successful adult learners as posited by Brockett and Hiemstra (1991),

Brookfield (1984), Merriam et al. (2007), and Tough (1971).

Addressing sub-research question 3: What leadership characteristics are identifiable among the selected members of SABR? In Table 7, the finding is: six of six interview participants, and SABR study group members, possessed certain leadership

characteristics. All SABR study group members are disciplined, intelligent, motivated, and possess high levels of drive and determination, in addition to other leadership characteristics. The SABR study group members are in total cooperation with one another toward the greater good of the group members and their respective research. It is to be noted that some members possessed additional leadership characteristics, such as charisma, dominance, sociability, and openness, among others traits associated with leadership.

In addition, the study objective included answering subsequent sub-questions based on the data collected. A theory was constructed, grounded in the findings of a pilot study and the existing scholarly research concerning adult learners, lifelong learners, self- directed learners, and leadership traits and characteristics.

In this chapter the interpretation of the findings are posed with adjustments to the original theoretical and conceptual frameworks. These interpretations will offer support to existing academic research, as well as make new contributions to the field of self- directed learning, what is currently known about adult and lifelong learners, as well as the leadership traits and characteristics of the adult learners in the study group. Lastly, recommendations are made for future studies based on the findings, analysis, and conclusions drawn from this study.

Conclusions

Additional conclusions have been drawn besides those listed in Table 7. These include:

• Leadership by learning for the greater good (Kuhnert, 1994).

• All group members are disciplined, intelligent, motivated, and possess high levels

of drive and determination.

• SABR group participants shared characteristics consistent with those found in

adult, self-directed learners.

• Learning is no longer part of the process, but the process itself from which the

group members achieve satisfaction.

• Baseball is as much worthy of academic research as art or theater due to how

engrained it is in culture.

• Interview participants and group members do not view doing extensive research

in a specialized field for little or no compensation as a unique characteristic.

Many of these conclusions refer specifically to the data collected from participant interviews. Several conclusions are extracted from consensus opinions of SABR group members during private conversations. Theories have been formulated based on observations and behavior, supported by the scholarly literature.

The majority of the interview participants engaged in some version of baseball in a variety of forms at some point in their lives. Most revealed that they lacked athletic ability, but enjoyed participating nonetheless. This indicated an early interest in the game of baseball regardless of the capability to play the game. The interest was not hampered by the lack of aptitude. Tom Shieber spoke of what ignited his initial interest in baseball history, which led him to focus on 19th century baseball history.

Tom was in elementary school. He lived in St. Louis, Missouri at the time. “I found a baseball,” Tom recalled. It was an autographed baseball from an Old Timer’s

Game. These were games conducted by various Major League teams pitting retired players from other eras against each other. “I took it [the baseball] home,” Tom continued. “I asked my Dad who the autographs were. He figured some of them out…there was a baseball book at home. Some sort of general baseball thing.” Tom still seems surprised by the book’s existence. “I don’t know why it was there because no one in the household had any particular interest in baseball. So it’s kind of strange as to why it was there.” This is an example of growing up with baseball as a significant part of

American culture. The book was there just in case there was a need for basic knowledge concerning some aspect of the game, similar to a person with little or no mechanical acumen owning a book on home or auto repair. Between that book and the library, “I was able to figure out the players. So what I did was, I was researching baseball” finished Tom.

Bill Humber, a professor from Seneca College in Toronto, Canada, wrote five books on different aspects of baseball and donated them all to the National Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, New York. Bill explained to the researcher his reason for such an undertaking. He shared that the Hall of Fame offers a free lifetime membership if you write a baseball book and donate it to the museum. Bill decided to make sure every member of his family had a lifetime membership. Bill shared his research knowing the

Hall of Fame would profit, just so the members of his family can share in his love for the game. Bill’s sense of belonging to a particular group has been passed along to his family members. Bill is not the only community college professor who is a group member.

When queried as to why they chose a community college over a 4-year institution, the overwhelming response was that a 2-year institution allows for the time to devote to

historical baseball research, 19th century or any era for that matter. Tom Simon, a group member who is an attorney from Vermont, stated that being an attorney allows him the financial resources to pursue his 19th century baseball history research.

Bill Lamb, another group member who practices law, claimed the same motivation. Bill believed he is not at the level of the other members of the group in terms of accomplishment or research ability. This is a sentiment shared by the majority of group members. He also does his research for what all interview participants agree are altruistic reasons. Bill is a fan of the game of baseball and he is driven to learn more about the history of the game he loves.

Employment or previous employment of the group members is primarily in four fields; education, technology, legal, and finance. The interview participants are an accurate representation of the group in terms of career choice. This is not to say persons employed or previously employed in these fields are more likely to have an interest in baseball history, specifically 19th century baseball history. Further research into employees in these areas may indicate shared characteristics with group members.

Recommendations

Since this is the first research of its kind to study an entire group where each member has reached high levels of proficiency in a field as an avocation, much may be expanded, and improved upon. Research conducted in this area has been sparse.

Brookfield (1984) studied individuals who achieved high levels of proficiency, but never an entire group. It has been over 30 years since a new examination of adult, self-directed, lifelong learners who are considered experts (individually) in their field outside their

100

chosen vocation, has been undertaken. This study has broached new insight that warrants further scholarship.

A new study may want to consider expanding the parameters and guidelines for inclusion. It was thought that a narrow participant group would lessen the margin for error. This may have proved correct, but yielded limited data. A new methodology, such as a narrative qualitative study, or a quantitative study including a comprehensive survey and analysis, may prove beneficial. This qualitative case study and the limited purposeful sample group revealed certain biases’ in terms of race and gender. The interview questions also revealed certain bias when probes were used to encourage the interview participants to divulge additional specificity. By expanding where and when interviews take place, as well as the number of interview participants, more definitive conclusions can be drawn. However, the conclusions drawn from the study that reflect the group’s experiences, characteristics, behavior, and thinking are consistent as well as conclusive.

In addition, it is recommended that in future research group members take the

Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) survey (Guglielmino, 1977) for greater accuracy and more definitive data concerning self-directed learners.

Significance

This study is significant in several contexts. As previously mentioned, it is the first study to examine an entire group of adult learners who, as an avocation, are proficient in the same field. As previously stated, Brookfield (1984) studied self-directed individuals who became proficient in a variety of fields. What has been learned about this community of practice (Hansman, 2001) concerning the self-directed, adult learners

101

in this study may apply to a larger group, not just historians of 19th century baseball, but to the nearly 7,000 SABR members, thereby meeting the challenge put forth by Brockett et al. in 2000, “to take the study of self-direction to a new level” (p. 563).

The study has also revealed the credibility of baseball history as an adult learning tool, supporting the work of Rick Lamb and E. Michael Brady in 2007 examining “what turns adult learners on” (p. 207). In addition, because of the scholarship produced by those who study 19th century baseball history, baseball history could one day be a viable field of academic study. Baseball has been determined in this study to be the hook on which to hang other research interests. It is significant that baseball history is the lens through which an examination of American history and culture may be viewed.

Through their experiences, mutual interest, self-direction, and shared learning journey, the community of practice (Hansman, 2001) formed by the members of the study group shows how unique this group of individuals really are. They comprise a group of adult learners who are not professionally trained historians. Yet, they bring credibility to their discipline, which generates sophisticated work, through their professionalization of research in 19th century baseball history, though just an avocation.

This phenomenon is truly unique to the field of American History.

Lastly, this study has revealed a level of research expertise achieved by the interview and group participants similar to that of professional academic scholars; yet, the primary remuneration is purely intellectual. The fulfillment derived from researching and sharing their findings of 19th century baseball history is what motivates the interview participants and the group members, thus supporting the observation made by Dr. John

Hardman (personal communication, February 7, 2013), “illuminating values of the

102

human condition previously unexplored.” The notion that little competition exists between members of the study group to be first when researching subject matter is also significant. There is no real financial incentive to do such research. There is a distinct lack of hierarchy within the group. These behaviors are what set the study group members apart from those who do research work as a vocation, and the quality of the research does not suffer. These determinations warrant further research that could prove beneficial to stakeholders in the adult, self-directed, and lifelong learning fields.

Summary

The experiences of historians of 19th century baseball history who produce the seminal work in the field as an avocation reflect the behavior and characteristics of the adult, self-directed, and lifelong learner as posited in previous scholarship. The central motivations of these individuals differ from others who produce scholarly research. The interview participants were driven by:

• Their sense of fulfillment;

• Their sense of belonging to the group;

• Their readiness to share their research with others; and

• Their need to learn for the greater good.

The study group members are not motivated by monetary compensation; quite the contrary. As stated, to do the research of this depth and scope, it often requires great expense at the cost of the researcher. There is no need to be the first to publish, or publish at all, the findings of the research produced; but to share freely with other group members and the public at large what has been discovered and verified.

103

These motivational factors support Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs pyramid with slight variation by the researcher. The foundation constructed on the characteristics of adult and lifelong learners remains the same. While leadership characteristics play a role in their learning, these traits and characteristics exist more because of the exclusive group the members belong to and the exclusive research they do. The characteristics of the self-directed learner are the next level up in the altered Maslow pyramid. The characteristics of adult and lifelong learners have now become further specialized. All study group members are self-directed learners. With little or no compensation to be made, and no real recognition aside from other group members and members of SABR, self-direction is what separates these adult and lifelong learners from others.

The next two levels should be interchanged. Esteem, confidence, and achievement among the study group members are not on the level of import that Maslow

(1943) assigned; however, recognition of others, not by others, requires that it be included in both levels. Recognition of others is decidedly more a part of the social- friendship, group membership, and social connection level that is second from the top.

Lastly, the top of the pyramid remains intact. All interview participants used the words, or similar variations of, found in the highest level of the adjusted pyramid—self- actualization, fulfillment, and inner purpose—when describing why they research 19th century baseball history and what they derive from doing this research.

The words most frequently appearing through the interview participant’s responses are shown in Table 5. These words, when appropriately constructed, form a theoretical, as well as a conceptual, framework. The experiences of historians of 19th century baseball are a group who share an interest and have a passion for learning and

104

baseball history research. They have a shared interest in history and baseball; in fact, the shared interest in history is due to baseball. They are passionate about their research and sharing it with the group of which they are passionate about being a part.

105

APPENDICES

106

Appendix A. FAU IRB Approval Letter

Institutional Review Board Mailing Address: Division of Research 777 Glades Rd., Bldg. 80, Rm. 106 Boca Raton, FL 33431

FLORIDA Tel: 561.297.0777 Fax: 561.297.2573 ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY http://www.fau.edu/research/researchint Michael Whitehurst, Ed.D., Chair

DATE: August 1, 2014

TO: Valerie Bryan, Ph.D. FROM: Florida Atlantic University Social, Behavioral and Educational Research IRB

IRBNET ID #: 582373-3 PROTOCOL TITLE: [582373-3] Historians of 19th century baseball: Exploring their motivations regarding their avocation

PROJECT TYPE: New Project ACTION: APPROVED

APPROVAL DATE: August 1, 2014 EXPIRATION DATE: July 31, 2015

REVIEW TYPE: Expedited Review REVIEW CATEGORY: Expedited review category # B7

Thank you for your submission of Response/Follow-Up materials for this research study. The Florida Atlantic University Social, Behavioral and Educational Research IRB has APPROVED your New Project. This approval is based on an appropriate risk/benefit ratio and a study design wherein the risks have been minimized. All research must be conducted in accordance with this approved submission.

• This study is approved for a maximum of 15 subjects. • It is important that you use the approved, stamped consent documents or procedures included with this letter. • Study approval is contingent upon use of a recruitment email that emphasizes the voluntary nature of the study. • **Please note that any revision to previously approved materials or procedures, including modifications to numbers of subjects, must be approved by the IRB before it is initiated. Please use the amendment form to request IRB approval of a proposed revision. • All SERIOUS and UNEXPECTED adverse events must be reported to this office. Please use the appropriate adverse event forms for this procedure. All regulatory and sponsor reporting requirements should also be followed, if applicable. • Please report all NON-COMPLIANCE issues or COMPLAINTS regarding this study to this office. • Please note that all research records must be retained for a minimum of three years. • This approval is valid for one year. A Continuing Review form will be required prior to the expiration date if this project will continue beyond one year.

- 1 - Generated on IRBNet

107

If you have any questions or comments about this correspondence, please contact Angela Clear at:

Institutional Review Board Research Integrity/Division of Research Florida Atlantic University Bldg. 80, Rm. 106 Boca Raton, FL 33431 Phone: 561-297-0777

* Please include your protocol number and title in all correspondence with this office.

This letter has been electronically signed in accordance with all applicable regulations, and a copy is retained within our records.

- 2 - Generated on IRBNet

108

Appendix B. FAU IRB Approved Adult Consent Form

ADULT CONSENT FORM

1) Title of Research Study: Historians of 19th century baseball: Exploring their motivations regarding their avocation 2) Investigators: Dr. Valerie Bryan and Wade Berstler 3) Purpose: The purpose of this qualitative case study is to explore the motivations of historians of 19th century baseball who produce the seminal work in the field as an avocation. The focus of the study is to determine the motivations and other factors of the members of The Society for American Baseball Research (SABR) who have attended the Frederick Ivor-Campbell Conference on 19th Century Baseball History (which takes place each April in Cooperstown, New York). To be selected you must have attended the Annual Conference at least four years. 4) Procedures: Participation in this study will require an audiotaped interview of approximately one half hour in duration consisting of seven questions with sub-questions. You, as a study participant, will also complete a short demographic survey. You will be asked to sign a consent form agreeing to participate in the study. You may choose to keep your identification anonymous or choose to waive your right to anonymity. You will have the opportunity to review the transcript of your interview. You may withdraw from the study at any time. 5) Risks: The risks involved with participation in this study are no more than you would experience in regular daily activities. 6) Benefits: The study may aid in the advancement of baseball history as an academic study and as an adult learning tool for other avocations; as well as provide new insights into the areas of self- directed learning, lifelong learning, and/or adult education. 7) Data Collection & Storage: All of the results of the study will be stored on a flash drive in a locked storage box in the co- investigator’s home. Only those involved with the study may examine the data gathered. The data will be kept for five years since it is being used for a doctoral dissertation and all data on a computer and a flash drive will be erased and all paper copies of the data will be destroyed. 8) Contact Information: *For related problems or questions regarding your rights as a research subject, contact the Florida Atlantic University Division of Research at (561) 297-0777. For other questions about the study, you should call the co- investigator, Wade Berstler, (305) 335-8542 or Dr. Valerie Bryan (954) 592-3224. 9) Consent Statement: **I have read or had read to me the preceding information describing this study. All my questions have been answered to my satisfaction. I am 18 years of age or older and freely consent to participate. I understand that I am free to withdraw from the study at any time without penalty. I have received a copy of this consent form.

I request to remain anonymous Yes______No______I agree to audiotaping Yes______No______

Signature of Subject:______Date:______Signature of Principal Investigator :______Date:______Signature of Co-Investigator______Date:______

Approved on: 8/1/2014 Expires on: 7/31/2015 Institutional Review Board

109

Appendix C. Interview Protocol

Opening

Thank you for agreeing to be interviewed regarding your motivations and other unique traits and characteristics that drive you to be involved in a group that produces the seminal work in their field of baseball as an avocation. You have been self-selected based on your involvement in the Society for American Baseball Research at the 2014 Frederick Ivor-Campbell Conference on 19th Century Baseball History over a period of four years and your willingness to share your knowledge. As discussed earlier you may stop at any time if you do not wish to continue with the questions. As noted on your consent form I will now record (or not record) the session. I will also use (or not use) your name when I cite your responses in the final study. I will also allow you an opportunity to review the results of this interview.

Interview Questions

4. What motivates the members of the SABR selected group to continue their own research in this area of study? a. PROBE

5. What are the shared characteristics of the members of this SABR selected group? a. PROBE

6. What are the unique characteristics of the members of this SABR group a. PROBE

7. RESEARCHER OBSERVATION ON INTERVIEWEE BASED ON RESPONSES ONLY: Does the individual in the group exhibit traits and characteristics that can be considered those of self-directed learners based on the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) (Guglielmino, 1977)? o Initiative o Independence o Persistence in learning o Acceptance of responsibility for one’s own learning o Self-discipline o High degree of curiosity o A strong ability to learn independently o Enjoyment of learning o A tendency to be goal-oriented o Tendency to view problems as challenges rather than obstacles

8. Based on your view, why, or why not, is the researching of 19th century baseball history relevant to the 21st century? a. PROBE

110

9. What established characteristics of adult learners are shared by this particular group? a. PROBE

10. What is the attraction of baseball and its history as an adult learning tool, and why is it a worthy field of academic study? a. PROBE

The interview questions are now finished and I need some demographic information from you just for comparison sake in this study. You may ask that this information be coded in any write-ups: a. What is your age? b. Interviewer notes gender. c. What is your nationality? d. Where were you born? e. Was your community more rural or urban? f. Was baseball a recreational activity for you when you were a child? g. What was your final educational education level? h. Did you play a sport in school? If so what? f. What occupation did you pursue? g. Did you attend baseball games as a pastime as an adult? h. When did you first become engage in baseball history? Can you remember why you became engaged?

Thank you for your time. I have enjoyed you reliving your history and passion with me.

111

Appendix D. List of Documents Reviewed

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). A history of SABR: Introduction.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). Conclusion/bibliography.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/22

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). Executive director.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/20

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). National conventions.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/5

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). Original resesarch committees.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/6

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). Other committees.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/7

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). Other Society publications.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/10

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). Philanthropy. Retrieved from

http://sabr.org/about/history/15

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). Preservation of baseball

research material. Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/14

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). Publications director.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/11

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). Public relations. Retrieved from

http://sabr.org/about/history/19

112

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). Regional chapters.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/16

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). SABR Awards. Retrieved from

http://sabr.org/about/history/21

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). SABR online. Retrieved from

http://sabr.org/about/history/17

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). SABR surveys. Retrieved from

http://sabr.org/about/history/12

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). Society services. Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/13

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). The Baseball Research Journal.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/8

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). The elected officials.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/2

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). The growth of the Society.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/18

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). The membership directory.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/3 (Actual directory document is only

available to SABR members)

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). The national pastime.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/9

Society for American Baseball Research (SABR). (n.d.). The SABR salute.

Retrieved from http://sabr.org/about/history/4

113

Thompson, D., & Hufford, T. (2013). A history of SABR. Retrieved from

http://sabr.org/about/history/1

114

Appendix E. Tom Shieber (2013) Conference Keynote Address Annotating Our

Way Into the Future of Baseball Research

Editor's note: This is a draft of Tom Shieber's keynote address for the Frederick Ivor- Campbell 19th Century Base Ball Conference on April 20, 2013, in Cooperstown, New York. This article is published in conjunction with Peter Mancuso's "Planning for a 19th Century Annotation Research Project," which you can read here.

Thanks, Jim [Gates]. Thanks, too, to Peter Mancuso, the SABR Nineteenth Century Committee, and SABR in general. And, in particular, I’d also like to thank Fred Ivor- Campbell: a great researcher, generous friend, and stellar role-model. I first joined SABR back in 1981 when I interned at The Sporting News in St. Louis. Every day I would eat lunch in “the vault,” surrounded by old newspapers, Spalding and Reach guides, Leonard Gettelson’s index cards, Charles Conlon’s original glass plate negatives, and countless other treasures for the baseball historian. Paul MacFarlane, archivist at The Sporting News before Steve Gietschier, told me about SABR. That was 32 years ago. I know this is probably the wrong group of people to say this to, but 32 years ago is a long time. Over those 32 years I have formed very definite opinions about what SABR is and what it should be. Today I’d like to talk about that and offer a few modest proposals to help SABR in general and the Nineteenth Century Committee in particular. I’d like to explore this a bit, through the lens of my own experience and, at times, that of the Nineteenth Century Committee. Conveniently, I think that an examination of our organization’s very name — the Society for American Baseball Research — is a great way to undertake this exploration, though I’d like to examine the name backwards, starting with the word … RESEARCH Research is SABR’s last name, but our first goal. I grew up in a family of researchers. They weren’t overtly researchers and I didn’t know or realize it at the time. My father loved reading Sherlock Holmes. I would often see him reading the “Annotated Sherlock Holmes,” a great work by William S. Baring-Gould, who had meticulously researched every aspect of what Sherlockians refer to as “the canon.” Ironically, Holmes himself is arguably the most celebrated applied researcher of all time. One of my brothers was similarly a fan of Lewis Carroll, and introduced me to Martin Gardner’s “Annotated Alice in Wonderland,” which (like the “Annotated Sherlock Holmes”) was published by Clarkson & Potter. They apparently were the publishing house for such annotated works. Gardner’s annotation is a classic. My oldest brother was a huge fan of J.R.R. Tolkien and I distinctly remember him taking notes on index cards as he read The Lord of the Rings. He was creating his own annotation. So it was through the particular method of annotating documents that I was exposed to research.

115

Now, most baseball researchers I’ve met have a few things in common. In particular, most are voracious readers and most have family members who are baseball fans. I am an anomaly. I was not much of a reader at all. Instead I was much more interested in images. And no one in my family was particularly interested in baseball. For some reason, however, I was interested in baseball. So, with a particular interest in baseball photographs, I applied what I saw at home. I annotated baseball images. I identified players, determined locations, narrowed down dates, etc. I created a photo index of every image in every baseball book I could get my hands on. I annotated photos … still do. Visit my blog at http://baseballresearcher.blogspot.com. You’ll see. In high school, for a major term paper in English, I submitted an annotation of Casey at the Bat, which coincidentally is celebrating its 125th anniversary this June. I know many of you think that Casey is the purview of the Hall of Fame’s Director of Research, Tim Wiles, but I have been a Casey “fiend” since the early 1980s. I felt that by presenting the poem with annotations, others could enjoy reading it, while at the same time learning about the game of baseball from 1888. So I examined the poem closely: • Were there really players named Cooney and Barrows? • Was a crowd with “five thousand throats and more” typical of a ball game in the 1880s? • Wasn’t it lucky that the poem was written in 1888, and not one year earlier, when Casey would have another strike coming to him? I worked hard. I took the subject very seriously. After all, it was my first foray into sharing my baseball research. Well, I suppose I couldn’t have done that great a job, as I didn’t realize that Martin Gardner himself had published an annotated Casey all the way back in 1967. I only discovered that well after I handed in my paper. To tell the truth, I can’t recall what grade I received … maybe something like a B+. But, more importantly, I vividly recall a note written by my English teacher atop the paper. He wrote “Tom – Perhaps one day you will realize how humorous this is.” He was saying that … 1. I didn’t realize what I was doing. 2. What I was doing was not to be taken seriously. This was a terrible thing to say, especially to a young student. Frankly, I am sorry he is not alive today, to see that annotations are the reason I am doing what I do now. Annotations introduced me to research and to the museum world at the same time. Annotating is a form of research that preserves at its core an original document. Through that document one presents research, but the original content remains the focus, the attractive force. From it, stems the research. I didn’t realize it, but by seeing members of my family reading or creating annotated documents, and by my doing so, as well, the museum experience was also being imprinted on me as a youngster. As I said, this is what I do for a living. I examine original material (what we call artifacts: documents, gloves, bats, trophies, photographs, audio and/or video recordings, etc.) and

116

through them present research (sometimes new research, sometimes not so new research.) In so doing, I tell a story. That is the core museum experience: Through an object, relate a story. In a very real sense, I annotate baseball objects. As I tell a story, I impart information (hopefully interesting, entertaining, educational), but I keep the original object as the attractive centerpiece. Research, not necessarily annotative research, but research in general is what SABR is about. It is first and foremost what we do and what we should remain focused upon. Another quick story about my Dad. First you need to know that my father was a surgeon, but basically never “brought his work home.” It was something that never came up in discussion that I ever recall. Well, one day we must have had one car in the shop and I was interning at The Sporting News, so I had to pick him up from the hospital. I had never picked my Dad up from work before. I picked him up and for the first time that I can remember asked him “How was work?” He replied with a somewhat dejected “Okay.” I hesitatingly asked, “Did someone die?” “Oh no. That’s not why it wasn’t a great day. I was in the middle of an operation and got called away to do a skin graft. Skin grafts just aren’t as much fun as the surgery I was doing.” I never thought of surgery as “fun.” But for my Dad, it was fun. It was what he enjoyed doing. My father wasn’t one to set you down and impart a life lesson, or preach. That wasn’t his style. But as we drove home he told me, “If somebody wants to become a surgeon, they better enjoy surgery. They shouldn’t be in it just because they like saving lives. That’s a good thing. But you don’t always save lives. Sometimes you don’t get a positive result. If what drives you, in whatever you do, is the outcome, if that is what you are relying upon, then you are in the wrong business. You have to enjoy the process, and not just be motivated by the results.” I had no interest in becoming a doctor, and my Dad knew that, but his words hit home. I’ve got nothing on my Dad. Even on my best days I’m not saving lives. (Thankfully, on my worst, I’m not losing any, either). But I am driven by the research process. That’s what I love. And that is what SABR is about. The research itself, not just the end results of research. Disseminating research — publishing a book or article, posting a blog, presenting a talk, being praised for doing a good job — these are good things, but they are endpoints. If you’re in it for that, you’re in the wrong job. Similarly, if that’s what SABR is all about, I’m not interested. But I don’t think that’s what SABR is about. It’s about the research process. For this reason, I’d like to propose that in future Frederick Ivor-Campbell 19th Century Base Ball Conferences, we include at least one presentation that focuses on the process of research. Not just the results. It need not be a “how to,” but it should involve a discussion of the process. And my hope is that we see more of these types of presentations at local SABR chapter meetings and annual conventions. Working backwards in SABR’s name, we next have:

117

BASEBALL Well, you’ve got to research something. For us it’s baseball. I am often asked why I research baseball, and I think the answer lies in something written by Mel Allen in his 1964 book You Can’t Beat the Hours. Allen wrote, “The nicest part about talking about the Yankees is that there isn’t anything else I would rather be doing.” Why do I research baseball? Because “there isn’t anything else I would rather be doing.” I suspect that is the case for many of you, as well. Interestingly, this committee has done more to expand and examine the word and the meaning of baseball than any other. Thanks to the efforts of many in this room and their research into early baseball and “proto-baseball,” we have learned much about what is baseball, what is not baseball. We don’t always agree on what is baseball and what is not baseball, but we sure have learned a lot. One of the most famous (and frankly overused quotes) about baseball is that of Jacques Barzun from his 1954 work God's Country and Mine. He said: “Whoever wants to know the heart and mind of America had better learn baseball, the rules and realities of the game — and do it by watching first some high school or small- town teams.” But now, with the truly impressive gains we’ve made in our understanding of early bat and ball games, I suppose the quote should read a bit differently. Perhaps this should be a new slogan for our humble group: “Whoever wants to know the heart and mind of baseball had better learn about early ball games — and do it by joining SABR's Nineteenth Century Committee.” Now we move backwards to the word: AMERICAN Let’s face it. This is the weak link in our organization’s name. We do more than research American baseball. There is lots of baseball to research outside of the Americas: baseball in Japan, baseball in Europe. And of course this committee has certainly done much to promote baseball research in England. In fact, the Hall of Fame can trump all of those locations. In late April 2013, we will be hosting an educational experience in which we collaborate with the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The JPL collaboration is a project called “Imagine Mars,” where kids will be tasked with thinking about what it would be like to play baseball on Mars. That’s right, we’re researching baseball on Mars. Why should we be limited by the word “American?” Didn’t we learn anything from Al Spalding’s jingoistic fervor at the turn of the last century that led us down the path of anointing Abner Doubleday as the game’s “good old American dad”: the inventor of baseball? SABR needs to need to move beyond the Americas. A little history lesson about SABR’s name will, I think, prove to be enlightening. When Bob Davids pulled together what he called a “motley crew” of “statistorians” in 1971 here in Cooperstown to form what we now call SABR, he had five ideas for names of the new organization. None of them were what we have now. They were: • 1) National Association for Baseball Research (NABR) Perhaps this would have been a better name. NABR (neighbor) sounds so

118

friendly. Many folks are scared off by SABR (SABR-rattling). Perhaps the more friendly NABR would have served us well. • 2) National Association of Baseball Research Historians (NABRH) Here the focus is on the historians rather than the research. But really, this is just NABR with a silent H. • 3) Society of American Baseball Historians (SABH) In this case, the word American makes more sense, as it modifies the Baseball Historians rather than our current situation, in which the word American modifies the Baseball Research itself. Still, it seems to exclude baseball researchers from overseas. • 4) Baseball Historical Research Association (BHRA) The downside here is that the acronym is pronounced either … BRA — which could be embarrassing and hard to take seriously; or BERRA — which could be even more embarrassing and even harder to take seriously. • 5) Baseball Historical and Statistical Society (BHSS) Now the acronym is BHSS, which, at best, comes out BITCHES. No, that’s no good, either. Of the five proposed names, only one included the word AMERICAN, while four of the five proposed names contained HISTORY, HISTORICAL or HISTORIAN. Yet, despite the four-to-one odds, HISTORY lost out to AMERICAN. I think we should broaden our scope, focus on our roots in HISTORY (not AMERICA), and better explain what we do by changing our name. I hereby propose that we remove the word AMERICAN and substitute the word HISTORICAL so that our organization would be known as … The Society for Historical Baseball Research. SHBR, pronounced SHIEBER. And now on to: SOCIETY I realize it is cliché to refer to a dictionary definition when doing this sort of exercise. But I’ve already stooped so low as to quote Jacques Barzun, so I might as well go all the way. Besides, I am hoping you will see a common thread among the many definitions of the word SOCIETY. Webster’s defines Society as: 1. companionship or association with one's fellows 2. a voluntary association of individuals with common interests 3. an enduring and cooperating social group whose members have developed organized patterns of relationships through interaction with one another 4. the progeny of a pair of insects when constituting a social unit (such as a bee hive) The first three definitions seem to me to be applicable here. What is key is that all of these definitions stress connectivity, interaction, working together. I would argue that SABR does a good job of being a society. We interact in local chapter meetings, in conferences such as this one, at our annual convention, on the internet

119

through SABR-L, Yahoo! Groups, through committee projects such as Protoball, etc. We do a good job, but not a great one. Many of these interactions are fairly simplistic. Often they are one person speaking to many, such as this presentation. I suppose this is somewhat interactive, but in an extremely limited fashion. For example, SABR-L is generally rather limited in its interactivity: • Can you help me with some research? • I found out this interesting thing that occurred. There is some amount of back-and-forth, but it is an imperfect, narrow form of interactivity. Can we do a better job of interacting such that the interactions are part-and-parcel to the research? Can the research itself be truly collaborative. Can the act of collaborating be integral to the research? In March of this year, Dr. Saskia Hin, a researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, published a paper titled “Interdisciplinary research collaboration as the future of ancient history? Insights from spying on demographers.” The particulars of this paper have nothing to do with baseball research, but in it Dr. Hin states that “the top four benefits of collaboration mentioned by a body of 195 university professors are: increased knowledge, higher scientific quality of research output, the establishment of contacts and connections for future work and the generation of new ideas.” I believe through greater and more comprehensive collaboration, SABR can likewise: • increase our knowledge • output higher quality research • establish contacts for future research • and generate new ideas for research I’ve already stated that our last name, RESEARCH, is what this organization is all about. However, I believe that the future of our organization lies in our first name: SOCIETY. Here’s why I think that is the case. There have been a number of “quantum leaps” or “game changers” in the history of historical research. Of course, many of these leaps occurred before the days of baseball research. (Yes, there really was a time when no one was doing baseball research.) Quickly here are a few of these leaps forward: • Various early advents in printing, whether it be movable type, the invention of printing press, advancements in lithography, all have been leaps forward for the historical researcher. • The 1650s saw the advent of public libraries in the colonies. • Microphotography as a means to preserve documents dates back to the 1850s and microfilming itself took off in the early 20th century. • The first formal inter-library loan dates back to the 1880s. Hooray for all of these. Moving towards more modern times, there have been great steps forward in allowing us to do our research thanks to: • the affordability of “home” computers starting in the 1970s • the popularization of e-mail, which really took off in the early 1980s • the accessibility and user-friendliness of the WWW in the 1990s

120

• the availability of and advancements in digitized, OCR’ed documents. I believe we can all agree that has been a major boon to researchers. When it comes to baseball research in particular, there have been numerous leaps forward, as well: • Books! We can all forward our own personal arguments for which particular books have been great leaps forward for the baseball researcher. We need not get bogged down with specific titles here, but the publication of books devoted to the game of baseball has been going on for over 150 years and is still going strong. • The formation of SABR itself in 1971 was critical to fostering baseball research. • The advent of affordable personal means of publication, whether it be traditional paper-based books that we can produce at the click of a button (such as the wonderful special edition of Inventing Baseball that Peter Mancuso just passed along), or blogs. This is just a short and incomplete list of breakthroughs that have advanced research, and in particular, baseball research. Now, certainly I am hoping for further improvements to these already-established baseball research aids: cheaper computers, faster internet connections, more and better digitized documents. (Will somebody please re-scan and re-OCR The Sporting News and The New York Clipper?) But these are advancements in already existing tools. Today, we are in the early stages of what I believe will be looked upon as the next “quantum leap” in historical research: ONLINE COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH. This is being done in various subjects at various locations on the web, sometimes in public spaces, other times not. I’d like to see SABR commit to and better utilize the “SOCIETY” in the “Society for American Baseball Research” by embracing online collaborative research. So how do we do this? Well, I hate to disappoint you, but I don’t really know. But I have an experiment that I’d suggest we try … a way to get our feet wet, but a simple, straightforward method of online collaborative research. But, I can’t (and won’t) try the experiment unless others buy in and help out. About six years ago, back when I was doing a lot more work developing websites than I do now, I created a web-based tool that allows multiple researchers to collaborate on annotating one or more books. You see: It all comes back to annotation. Here’s how it works. The text of a book in the public domain is placed on a website devoted to the project. Anyone can read that text. Anyone can also read the annotations and the back-and-forth discussions added by multiple readers. Those with a user account can read the text, read the annotations, and can add annotations. Additionally, account holders can discuss existing annotations, thus furthering the research conversation. As a demonstration, I added the text of John Ward’s Base-Ball: How to Become a Player to the site. Let’s say I have an account. I see that, in the introduction of Ward’s book, he notes that the first ball game on record was recorded by Homer in The Odyssey: O'er the green mead the sporting virgins play, Their shining veils unbound; along the skies, Tost and retost, the ball incessant flies. I add a note that states that Johnny failed to include the first line of the couplet:

121

And while the robes imbibe the solar ray, Perhaps another annotator sees this and he/she adds to the discussion, stating that this is Alexander Pope’s particular translation of The Odyssey. You might ask: How does this differ from Wikipedia? Well, in a lot of ways it is similar, but: • It’s not a free-for-all; accounts are not available to the general public. • More importantly, it is an annotation. We start with and preserve the core, original content. We are riffing off the original content. It grows solely upon itself. • Wikipedia has no core, original content around which research notes are added. The wiki entry occurs around a concept or subject, not original content. In this case, the research project, an annotated version of Ward’s book, evolves as researchers work together. It is always growing and changing. It promotes and benefits from interaction and research. Multiple individuals have a hand in the project. Hopefully we have an interdisciplinary group of researchers working on the project: some from the Nineteenth Century Committee, others from the Bibliography Committee, still others from the Biographical Committee, etc. It is reliant on and hopefully successful because of the process, not the end-point. In fact, with this particular collaborative annotation project, I’m not sure there really is an endpoint. It is research and the sharing of research for the sake and the joy of the research. So, I’ve already created the tool and can make it available online. To be honest, the tool is somewhat rudimentary and not highly polished. There are other commercial packages online that are in many ways quite similar. But those packages weren’t around when I invented this tool back in 2007, and mine has a couple of immediate advantages: • It’s free. • It does not require anything to download. • It can be implemented quite soon. The nice thing about the core content we would be annotating (one or more 19th-century books) is that most of these are in the public domain, though not all have already been scanned and OCR’ed. But if enough researchers are interested in participating, we can choose whichever book we’d most like to tackle with this Web-based text annotation tool and have at it. So the question is: Do we have a core group of researchers who would want to take part in this little experiment, beta-testing the tool and, more importantly, a new form of research: online collaborative research? There’s no need to answer immediately. I’ve had this tool/idea waiting around for half a dozen years. I propose that over the coming months we talk about it. We can take it slow and give it a test run before unleashing it to a larger audience. For those interested, I would be happy to show you the tool in action. In the meantime, thanks for listening and … back to research.

122

Appendix F. Research Questions

1. What motivates the selected members of SABR to continue their own research in

this area of study?

2. What are the shared characteristics, if any, of the selected members of SABR?

3. What are the unique characteristics, if any, of the selected members of SABR?

4. Do the selected members of SABR group exhibit traits and characteristics that can

be considered those of self-directed learners based on the Self-Directed Learning

Readiness Scale (SDLRS) criteria (Guglielmino, 1977)?

5. Based on the views of the participants, why, or why not, is the researching of 19th

century baseball history relevant to the 21st century?

6. What is the attraction of baseball and its history as an adult learning tool, and why

is it a worthy field of academic study?

7. What established theorized characteristics of adult learners are shared by this

particular group?

8. What leadership characteristics are identifiable among the selected members of

SABR?

123

REFERENCES

Bakshi, M. (Producer), & Miller, B. (Director). (2011). Moneyball [Motion picture]

United States: Sony Pictures.

Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist,

37(2),122–147.

Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and

research. New York, NY: Free Press.

Baumgartner, L. M. (2001). An update on transformative learning. In S. Merriam (Ed.),

The new update on adult learning theory, New Directions for Adult and

Continuing Education, 89 (pp.15–24). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. New

York, NY: Harper & Row.

Block, D. (2005). Baseball before we knew it. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Bloom, B., Englehart, M. Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of

educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I:

Cognitive domain. New York, NY: Longmans.

Bloomberg, L. D. & Volpe, M. (2012). Completing your qualitative dissertation: A road

map from beginning to end. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2008) Reframing organizations: artistry, choice, and leadership

(4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bouton, J. (1970). Ball four. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

124

Bradley, S. (Ed.) (1953). With Walt Whitman in Camden. Philadelphia, PA:

University of Pennsylvania Press/

Brockett, R., & Hiemstra, R. (1991). Self-direction in adult learning: Perspectives on

theory, research, and practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

Brockett, R. G., Stockdale, S. L., Fogerson, D. L., Cox, B. F., Canipe, J. B., Chuprina, L.

A., & Chadwell, N. E. (2000). Two decades of literature on self-directed

learning: A content analysis. Paper presented at the 14th International Self-

Directed Learning Symposium, Boynton Beach, FL.

Brookfield, S. (1981). Independent adult learning. Studies in Adult Education, 13(1), 15–

27.

Brookfield, S. (1984). Adult learners, adult education and the community. Buckingham,

United Kingdom: Open University Press.

Brookfield, S. (1986). Understanding and facilitating adult learning: A comprehensive

analysis of principles and effective practices. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Brookfield, S. D. (2000). Transformative learning as ideology critique. In J. Mezirow

(Ed.), Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress

(pp. 125–148). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Caffarella, R. S. (1993). Self‐directed learning. In S. B. Merriam (Ed.), New Directions

for Adult and Continuing Education, 57 (pp. 25–35). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-

Bass.

Caffarella, R. S., & O’Donnell, J. M. (1987). Self-directed adult learning: A critical

paradigm revisited. Adult Education Quarterly, 37(4), 199–211.

125

Candy, P. C. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learning: A comprehensive guide to

theory and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Casway, J. (2004). Ed Delahanty in the emerald age of baseball. Notre Dame, IN:

University of Notre Dame Press.

Chadwick, H. (1860). Beadle’s dime base-ball player: Compendium of the game.

New York, NY: Irwin P. Beadle & Co. Publishers.

Clardy, A. (2000). Learning on their own: vocationally oriented self-directed learning

projects. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11(2), 105–125.

Cooper, J. F. (1838). The chronicles of Cooperstown. Cooperstown, NY: H. & E.

Phinney.

Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five

approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Delahaye, B. L., & Ehrich, L.C. (2008). Complex learning preferences and strategies of

older adults. Educational Gerontology, 34(8), 649–662.

Dickie, C., & Jay, L. (2010). Innovation in postgraduate teaching: mixed methods to

enhance learning and learning about learning. Higher Education Research and

Development, 29(1), 29–43.

Gibbons, M., Bailey, A., Comeau, P., Schmuck, J., Seymour, S., & Wallace, D. (1980).

Toward a theory of self-directed learning: A study of experts without formal

training. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 20(2), 41–56.

Goldstein, W. (1989). Playing for keeps: A history of early baseball. Ithaca, NY:

126

Cornell University Press.

Guglielmino, L. M. (1977). Development of the Self-Directed Readiness Learning Scale

(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Georgia. Dissertation Abstracts

International, 38, 6764A.

Guglielmino, L. (2008). Why self-directed learning? International Journal of Self-

Directed Learning, 5, (1) 1-14.

Hansman, C. A. (2001). Context-based adult learning. In S. B. Merriam (Ed.), Special

issue: The new update on adult learning theory, New Directions for Adult and

Continuing Education, 89 (pp. 43–52). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Hawking, J. (2012). Strikeout: Baseball, Broadway and the brotherhood in the 19th

Century. Santa Fe, NM: Sunstone Press.

Holton, E. F., Swanson, R. A., & Naquin, S. S. (2001). Andragogy in practice: Clarifying

the andragogical model of adult learning. Performance Improvement Quarterly,

14(1), 118–143.

Houle, C. (1961). The inquiring mind. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

House, R. J. (1976). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. Toronto, Canada: Faculty

of Management Studies, University of Toronto.

Jung, D. I., & Sosik, J. J. (2006). Who are the spellbinders?: Identifying personal

attributes of charismatic leaders. Journal of Leadership and Organizational

Studies, 12(4), 12–26.

Kauffman, D. M. (2002). Applying educational theory in practice. British Medical

Journal, 326(1), 213–216.

127

Kawulich, B. B. (2005). Participant observation as a data collection method. Forum

Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(2).

Retrieved from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0502430

Kirkpatick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: Do traits matter? The Executive,

5(2), 48–60.

Kirsch, G. (2003). Baseball in Blue and Gray: The National Pastime During The Civil

War. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-directed learning. New York, NY: Association Press.

Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From Pedagogy to

andragogy (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge Books.

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., III, Swanson, R. A. (1998). The adult learner: The

definitive classic in adult education and human resource development

(5th ed.). Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.

Kolb, D. A. (1976). The Learning Style Inventory. Boston, MA: McBer.

Kramlinger, T., & Huberty, T. (1990). Behaviorism versus humanism. Training and

Development Journal, 44(12), 41–45.

Kuhnert, K. W. (1994). Transforming leadership: Developing people through delegation.

In B. M. Bass & B. J. Avolio (Eds.), Improving organizational effectiveness

through transformational leadership (pp. 10–25). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lamb, R., & Brady, E. M. (2005). Participation in lifelong learning institutes: What turns

members on? Educational Gerontology, 31,(3), 207–224.

Lewis, M. (2004). Moneyball: The art of winning an unfair game. New York, NY: WW

Norton & Company.

128

Locke, J. (1905). An essay concerning human understanding. New York, NY: Wallachia

Publishers. (Original work published 1690)

Lord, R. G., DeVader, C. L., & Alliger, G. M. (1986). A meta-analysis of the relation

between personality traits and leadership perceptions: An application of validity

generalization procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 402–410.

Major League Baseball. (2011). John Thorn named Official Baseball Historian [Press

release]. Retrieved from

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20110301&conte

nt_id=16776310&vkey=pr_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Major League Baseball. (2012). Opening Day rosters feature 243 players born outside of

the U.S. [Press release]. Retrieved from

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120405&content_id=27953108&vke

=pr_ mlb&c_id=mlb

Mann, R. D. (1959). A review of the relationship between personality and performance

In small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 56(4), 241–270.

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–

396.

Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach: An

interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B. (2001). Andragogy and self-directed learning: Pillars of adult learning

129

theory. In S. B. Merriam (Ed.), Special issue: The new update on adult learning

theory, New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 89 (pp. 3–14). San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B. (2005). How adult life transitions foster learning and development. In M.

A. Wolf (Ed.), New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 108 (pp. 3–

13). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B., & Brockett, R. G. (1997). The profession and practice of adult

learning: An introduction. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood:

A comprehensive guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mullen, L. (2012, November, 5-11). Lozano rebrands firm MVP Sports Group, signs 3

players. Street & Smith’s Sports Business Journal, 15(29), 14.

Muret, D. (2012, October 29-November 4). Brooklyn’s finest: Newest NYC venue has a

vibe of its own. Street & Smith’s Sports Business Journal, 15(28), 1, 28–29.

Northouse, P. (2010). Leadership: Theory and practice (5th ed). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Palmer, P., & Gillette, G. (2016, March 11). Players by place of birth: Foreign

countries and U. S. territories. Retrieved from http://www.baseball-

reference.com/bio/

Pastore, E. (2011). 500 ballparks: From wooden seats to retro classics. San Diego,

CA: Thunder Bay Press.

130

Rader, B. (2002). Baseball: A history of America’s game. Chicago, IL: University of

Illinois Press.

Rampersad, A. (1997). Jackie Robinson: A biography. New York, NY: Alfred A.

Knopf, Inc.

Riess, S. (1980). Professional baseball and social mobility. Journal of Interdisciplinary

History, 11(2), 235–250.

Schiff, A. (2008). Henry Chadwick. Retrieved from

http://sabr.org/bioproj/person/436e570c

Seymour, H. (1956). The rise of major league baseball to 1891 (Doctoral dissertation).

Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (UMI 301990884).

Seymour, H. (1990). Baseball: The people’s game. New York, NY: Oxford University

Press.

Shieber, T. (2013, April 20). Annotating our way into the future of baseball research

[Speech transcript]. Keynote address delivered to the Frederick Ivor-Campbell

19th Century Base Ball Conference, Cooperstown, NY. Retrieved from

http://sabr.org/content/shieber-annotating-our-way-future-baseball-research

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications.

Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the

Literature. Journal of Psychology, 25(1), 35–71.

Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research.

New York, NY: Free Press.

131

Thompson, D., & Hufford, T. (2013). A history of SABR. Retrieved from

http://sabr.org/about/history/1

Thorn, J. (2011). Baseball in the Garden of Eden: The secret history of the early game.

New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Thorn, J. (2012, June 15). Whitman, Melville, and baseball [Web log post]. Retrieved

from http://ourgame.mlblogs.com/2012/06/15/whitman-melville-and-baseball/

Thorn, J., Birnbaum, P., & Deane, B. (2004). Total baseball: The ultimate baseball

encyclopedia (8th ed). Wilmington, DE: Sport Media Publishing Inc.

Tough, A. (1971). The adult’s learning projects: A fresh approach to theory and

practice in adult learning. Toronto, CA: Ontario Institute for Studies in

Education.

Truluck, J. E., & Courtenay, B. C. (2010). Learning preferences among older adults.

Educational Gerontology, 25(3), 221–236.

Tygiel, J. (2000). Past time: Baseball as history. New York, NY: Oxford University

Press.

Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experiences. Albany, NY: State University of

New York Press.

Ward, G., & Burns, K. (1994). Baseball: An illustrated history. New York, NY: Alfred

A. Knopf, Inc.

Weber, N. F. (2007). The Clarks of Cooperstown: Their Singer sewing machine

fortune, their great and influential art collections, their forty-year feud.

New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.

Wlodkowski, R. J. (1985). How to plan motivational strategies for adult instruction.

132

Performance+Instruction, 24(9), 1–6.

Wolf, M. A. (1986, October). Backwards and forwards: An approach to understanding

the older adult learner. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American

Association for Adult and Continuing Education, Hollywood, FL.

Wolff, B. (1996). It’s not who won or lost the game: It’s how you sold the Beer. South

Bend, IN: Diamond Communications Inc.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research design and methods third edition. Applied social

research methods series, 5. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Zaccaro, S. J. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist,

62(1), 6–16.

Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp, C., & Bader, P. (2004). Leader traits and attributes. In J. Antonakis,

A. T. Cianciolo, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The nature of leadership (pp. 101–124).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

133