Facing My Fears

Seldom, if ever, have we explained the relevance of the humanities to our students and to our society itself.  It may have been obvious to us, but to the career minded it must seem superfluous.
Perhaps we need to remind ourselves and them of the life and career enhancing possibilities that a wide and deep exposure to the humanities can offer.  I suppose it can even be advanced that in many cases it can increase their future money making power as well. 

I completely agree with you that we need a larger core curriculum to encourage interdisciplinary work and overall respect of different fields of scholarship.  I received a BA in history and a BS in electrical and computer engineering and would often get hostile reactions from people when they hear my majors.  Yet, as someone with a more round education than most, I advocate at least a minor in the opposite end of the spectrum, so long as the student has some interest.  Unfortunately, the common response from humanities students is that the sciences are too hard and the science majors say the humanities aren’t important.  But there is something good to be gained by understanding the practical and physical nature of the world, as well as the aesthetic and spiritual.

Take it one step at a time. Applying does not entail getting the job, so why not apply. If you get an interview, well, that does not guarantee you get the job either. So, you don’t need to worry until you get an offer. But then you can talk to people there and get a better feeling. In sum, when you fear a process like this, break it down into parts and focus on each step. It will reduce the anxiety.

Don’t apply. I’m going on the market this year too, and I need all the openings I can get.

Apply, but please seek advice from someone who has negotiated the process successfully.  Many applicants disqualify themselves because they don’t know how to make their applications competitive.

Henry Adams

i would just go through the process to for the adrenaline rush .. and renew my abilities at interviewing.If they offer you the position you still have the alternative of saying no..if you don’t get it you still would have had an opportunity to dust up your resume and interview skills for the next big one. 
 if you don’t  give it a try there will always be that nagging : could have, should have, would have…..

Go through the process, but do it at several schools. If you can get an interview beforehand at another school, that will be great practice if you are selected for an interview at your choice institution. Good luck!

This is not a very persuasive argument. It should not be up to the coach to decide whether a player’s attitude is good enough to  merit a four-year scholarship.  All recruits should be guaranteed a four-year scholarship that should only be revocable on the grounds of university disciplinary action.  What’s really going on here is that wealthy programs like Alabama like to oversign prospects as a way to maintain strong classes.  When one player loses his scholarship, it is suddenly “convenient” for another player to fill the void.  As a result, the football powers above have shockingly low graduation rates.  In contrast, programs like Notre Dame that guarantee 4-year scholarships have very high graduation rates.  Just look at the statistics.

I am all for student-athletes getting 4 years of academic scholarship aid but it is absurd to say that ther can’t be conditions attached. What about the world you live in comes without contractual obligations and responsibilities? If they hold up there end of the bargain, they will be retained. Should employers guarantee 5 years of assured employment to new hires regardless of how they perform?

Should it be up to a student-athlete to decide that he or she will do whatever they want since they are guaranteed a 4 year scholarship? Since they have that in the bank, why bother to come to practice or show up for weights at 6 AM or stay in shape over the summer?  Why can’t a scholarship have conditions?  Most do. The fact is that if a student-athlete does follow team rules and maintains academic eligibility then he or she will always be renewed. It is not that complicated. Most ADs expouse the principle of “you brought them here, you graduate them.” Are there exceptions that prove the rule, sure, but we aren’t discussing the cases 3 standard deviation points from the mean. Comparing Alabama and Notre Dame and saying it is the scholarships that make the diffenece in grad rates misses about 15 intervening variables that make that assertion perlious at best. Of course a coach will encourage someone to transfer if the student  wants more playing time or feels the team system is not for them. There are no guarantees in life and certainly not in sports. And, in case anyone has missed this point, if a student were to have a scholarship non-renewed, he or she is not suspended from school, they remain a student and can continue to work towards graduation. That is the point of being in school, right? Should they also be guaranteed a Stafford loan regardless of their parents income?

I strongly disagree that coaches can unilaterally and without consequence act as “kangaroo courts” and simply pull scholarships based on some minor or trumped up “rules violation” charge. I don’t think you understand the NCAA rules or the layers of administrative attention and active athletic compliance dept  regulation of scholarships  required at each institution. Maybe in 1968 coaches could just tell you to get the hell off the team and then take your money and girlfriend away but despite the growth of money and greed in the industry, there has been an equal growth in oversight of “institutional control.”  Yes, students leave teams for many reasons, they become permanently injured, they decide to go someplace where they will get more playing time, there is a coaching change and current players don’t “fit” the new coach’s system so they leave to go elsewhere, they fail drug tests, they become academically ineligible, etc. Do coaches encourage players to leave for a variety of reasons, of course they do and, yes, some of those reasons are self-serving but, once again, you are just wrong if you claim that a coach can just non-renew a student’s academic scholarship for any trivial reason and not be questioned. I know you want that to be true. From what you say, you do not appear to have had any recent access to the inner workings of an athletic department. But if you can document that these “firings” are taking place in the way you indicate, please give us the source.

But no contract is without rules, as it stands now academic scholarships are renewed annually in July. If a student-athlete has abided by the terms of the scholarship and regardless of the student’s relative contribution to the team’s athletic success, the contract is renewed. Also, regardless of whether  or not a student were to have a 4 year scholarship, it is still theirs to maintain or lose, right? Let’s say I  have a 4 year scholarship but if the contract says a DUI is reason for team dismissal then I can be kicked off the team for drunk driving, no? Or am I kicked off the team, keep my scholarship and now drink and drive freely? Why should there be a 4 year guarantee? Why does participation in athletics equal a four year free ride on tuition? I think it is somewhat disengenuous to say that they need to be treated as either employees or students and nothing in between. That just ignores the fact we have to reconcile that sports and academics at universities mix a bit like oil and water. For some, athletics might get them in the door but are we more concerned about whether they get to play subsidized football for four years or whether they find a meaningful major and graduate. These student-athletes are still human for the most part and can survive  like the other 25,000 students on campus who never had a sports security blanket to start with. If a player loses his or her scholarship for a clearly understood and contractual reason then they can get a Pell Grant, a Stafford Loan or find another way to finish their education. The coach doesn’t dismiss them from school. Anyway, advocating paying student-athletes is another way of advocating the end of college sports, which is fine I guess. But, how about taking all the money away from the greedy adults and leave the kids alone?