Those wonderful "non-profits" and the NCAA

New Grades on Academic Progress Show Widespread Failings Among Top NCAA Teams

The Chronicle of Higher Education Tuesday, March 1, 2005

Requires user name password


http://chronicle.com/prm/daily/2005/03/2005030101n.htm

Do the so-called non-profits knowingly admit students not academically qualfied so they can win at sports? Some from non-profits knock the for-profits, yet big time sports at the non-profits is a big business!

We read that schools like the University of Phoenix are only in it for the $$. Well, what do you call recruiting students that you know cannot pass just so you can win a ball game?

Remember, these are "scholarship" students for the most part.

Just my opinion

 

quote

I am certain that the answer to this is "Yes."

Many people in the know do realize that this is a big problem for schools and for the NCAA. Some, maybe even many, schools ostensibly recruit academically mediocre but athletically-gifted students.

I do, however, hope that one would not use this as an argument supportive of unaccredited entities or legal but not legitimate for-profit schools - that is, "since some non-profit schools do it, they (unaccredited/for-profits) should be allowed to do it, too!" Mediocrity is mediocrity no matter the source. Shady practices are not to be emulated but are to be condemned, no matter who commits them.

There is some evidence that some recruited students are blatantly exploited at such big schools for athletic/sports purposes and that obtaining an education is the farthest thing on some school administrator's or coach's or even student's and sometimes, their parent's or family's minds.

The NCAA and professional sports bodies claim that they are reworking and constantly evaluating the situation. Some changes are definitely in order.

But let us not miss the forest for the obscuring hardwood trees. The numbers and proportions of under-achieving or low-achieving student-athletes at many schools are dwarfed by the numbers and proportions of higher-achieving student-athletes in particular, and the entire enrolled student body in general.

The high-profile, academically-challenged, booster-propped, so-called students on the ball fields of college sports ARE the exception in any school with total enrollment figures in the hundreds or thousands. This is also true at the high school level.

Please note:

Cedric W. Dempsey, NCAA President, reports that:

- There are nearly 1 million high-school football players and about 550,000 basketball players. Of that number, about 250 make it to the NFL and about 50 make an NBA team.

- Less than 3 percent of college seniors will play one year in professional basketball.

- The odds of a high-school football player making it to the pros at all--let alone having a career--are about 6,000 to 1; the odds for a high-school basketball player--10,000 to 1.

Quality matters and quality education matters even more. The numbers show that student-athletes are in the minority, at the high school and college levels.

Student-athletes in schools are in the minority. Accredited academic programs target the entire school, college, university or specific programs, not delineated portions of the student body. Student-athletes are the exception.

The exception NEVER proves any rule, as per Logic 101.

But yes, major college athletics and sports programs need to clean up their act re: student-athlete admission profiles and graduation rates. I am, and I am sure many others are, with you on this, if in fact, this is your point. I hope it is.

Thanks.

 

Go to the ncaa site

I went and looked at some schools I was interested. Even the schools "passing" aren't doing a very good job. Didn't see any that appeared to be over 60%...

 

It gets better...

The Cost of Empty Seats


http://chronicle.com/prm/weekly/v51/i26/26a03901.htm March 4, 2005

Requires user name password

Spend millions of dollars on something few people care to attend so they can be in the Big Leagues.

Love those Non-Profit schools!

Just my opinion

 

Re: It gets better...

What a noble cause.

An interesting comparison. From all their "evilness", for-profits sure pay Uncle Sam millions in taxes from their revenues. Non profits, otoh, are tax exempt: that means they get to keep it ALL. So make no mistake, when it means making a profit, the non-profits beat the for-profits hands down.

Sulla

 

Nah. Thats ubsurd. Non-profits do not make a profit at all. For profits are the bread and butter of revenue. That is why non-profit universities develop and incorporate for profit subsidaries. As a result, for-profits generate substantial revenue for corpor... I mean government funded institutions of education, tax free. To instigate that non-profits make more money than for-profits is proposterous. How could you say that sulla.