5 Professors and Watchdog Group Sue to Block Prayer Event at Air Force Academy

Vague article but…is this the same military branch that has chaplains? And the same base/school renowned for its inspiring architecture that takes the form of [gasp] a chapel/church?

Is the reference to the quote above supposed to show that McClary shouldn’t be allowed to speak because he supports the wrong branch of the military? that he doesn’t think the Lord condones aerial vs. ground combat? or that spirituality has again been permitted to slither into an academy?

BTW, is speaking to a god not, as randolllott infers, still a form of speech?

Military sponsorship of the event surely violates the Nonestablishment Clause of the First Amendment, at least if such sponsorship is available for nonChristian and for that matter atheist events. The reasoning is much the same as in public education cases.
James Madison, for one, thought that the First Amendment ruled out public funding of chaplains. Personally I think that the exigencies of military service make the availability of military chaplains somewhat defensible, esp. if they operate in private interactions and no religious faith is privileged.

Will lunch still be available on campus without the speaker? There is no way that public funds should be used to pay for any part of an event such as this – and you know that who does and does not attend will be noted!! Further, it is my understanding from previous stories re religious intolerance (i.e., intolerance of people who prefer to NOT participate in such activities) at the military academies that the students are as nasty to non-participating individuals as the officers are.

So, will this same group of Professors and the Watchdog Group sue President Obama for speaking last Thursday morning at the 59th annual National Prayer Breakfast? Lot of personal faith talk and quoting scripture by the commander-in-chief of the armed forces.

Can someone explain to Professor Vedder that the criminal legal system does still exist and still uses cross examination, trial by jury, and so forth in rape cases?  Citizens can use this system (assuming they can get the prosecutor’s office to agree).  If the criminal system can’t be used, the civil system can be used, which does, strangely enough, use a “preponderance of evidence” norm.  These must be new ideas to Vedder who must have slept through 8th grade civic class.  He seems to confuse administrative activities in public and private schools with the state police and juridical system.

Perhaps the professor would like to see term paper plagiarism cases handled by Federal law so FIRE could take them to the Supreme Court.

Chuck Kleinhans

It is sad to see an economic historian of Vedder’s talent waste it as he has done these many years with his half-baked, superficial, and ideologically driven analyses of higher education. Does he really think that any of this work has a shelf-life longer than a banana?

From the article:
 The guidelines lowered the level of proof required during a disciplinary hearing, recommending a move from “clear and convincing” evidence to a “preponderance” of the evidence, a standard that uses a “more likely than not” sort of logic.
“Colleges are caught between a rock and a hard place because their process is going to be microscopically picked over by students who are accused,” Mr. Lake said. “Understandably so, because it is essentially a scarlet letter if you’re accused.”
The jury’s conclusion that Sewanee was negligent in handling the case shows how important it is that universities have fair policies and administer them consistently, said Robert Shibley, senior vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.
——
Hey, reads like the overall system is working: The effect of the new DOJ standard is to make private schools even more procedurally careful and cautious.  That’s good, isn’t it?  FIRE seems to think so.  So what’s your beef, jff?

Chuck Kleinhans

Where are the professors, deans, and presidents? 

Most haven’t directly experienced injustice. And words are insufficient to effectively communicate injustice. In other words, individuals have limited sympathies, limited understanding, and little or no motivation to put an end to injustice, until their lives are directly affected by injustice. 

As chuckkle has already pointed out, Vedder is conflating a number of different situations.
The Constitution protects citizens against actions by governmental bodies which can result in fines and incarceration; in other words, criminal penalties.  Civil actions are less directly covered.
The situation that Vedder described involves neither the criminal nor the civil court system.
Rather it’s an instance of a ‘what happens on campus stays on campus’ policy.
As someone who started his college career in 1959 and retired three years ago, I suspect that I can match Vedder instance for instance.
Typically, this sort of situation arises when some campus body (on our campus the Office of Student Affairs) tries to deal with situations without involving the court system.
A rape accusation would be viewed as a violation of the student code of honor, and the Office would try to resolve the complaint while protecting the rights and interests of all students involved.  The Office can not impose either criminal or civil penalties; the most that it can do is to suspend or dismiss the student.  Thus this is not a constitutional issue.
If the accuser had wanted civil or criminal penalties imposed, she (?) should have reported the incident to the local police.  If the case were prosecuted, the accused would then have a constitutional right to confront the accuser.
If this failed and the accuser brought a civil suit (see O.J.) then the standard would be ‘preponderance of evidence’.

Parenthetically, Vedder also conflates free speech and academic freedom (which he raises in the context of faculty tenure).
Free speech involves the use of the campus as a public forum by all members of the campus community.  Any topic may be involved short of a direct incitement to violence.
Academic freedom (as protected by faculty tenure), on the other hand, concerns the right of a faculty member to express opinions in her classes which fall within the subject of the class and her professional competence.
Thus, as a Professor of Economics, Vedder can espouse any economic system that he wants to in his classes.  On the other hand, most of his opinions on the legal system would NOT be protected by academic freedom and (in theory at least) he could be accused of violating the terms of his contract.

And as frankschmidt points out, in Vedder’s good old days (in my case, 1960), a Dean did, in fact, threaten to expel me because I did not properly wear a tie to dinner (I had a bow tie clipped to my jacket lapel).

“In the Golden Age of higher education, defined as when I attended school
(around 1960), colleges were viewed as oases of free speech with full
respect for First Amendment rights.”

Oh, this should be good…

“In 1964, for example, the school where I teach, Ohio University, allowed
a hateful leader of the American Nazi Party to spill his venom on the
campus, believing free and unfettered peaceful expression of ideas is
the hallmark of a good university.”

Sounds like it WAS a Golden Age of higher education, all right – for rich WASP cis men who could come to college unfettered by nonsense like lack of societal privilege, or fear of being assaulted and threatened on campus just for being the wrong race, sex, gender presentation, religion or class.

I wonder why campus policies on sexual assault were basically nonexistent back then?  I mean, it certainly couldn’t be because college administrators basically didn’t care, just like most of society didn’t care.  Hmmm…

It cannot be overlooked that the guidance from the Office of Civil Rights regards the commision of a felony.  As a crime, it was struck down as a capital offense only in 2008.  Given that the accusation may lack the evidentary basis for procecution as a crime, or even a civil action, the OCR now provides for rape penatlies under a more likely-than-not rule.  The difficullty comes in a easily-obtained ~wrongful~ rape conviction by a uniivesity judicial body under this standard is ruinous to reputation and future earning capacity, as well as personally damaging socially and emotionally. The trichotomy of laws and rules here provides a convienent circumvention of the consequences of judicial actions and gives a false comfort that we are aquitting ourselves justly.

Hmm … folks criticize author for straying out of his expertise, but then they get it wrong also?

FYI – Graduated from law school in the 70s, and practiced for decades, including stints in federal courts, prosecution offices, private practice, and public institutions.

FWIW – For state schools, plenty of Constitution protection against deprivations without ‘due process’ and ‘equal protection.’  Please re-read U.S. Bill of Rights, and state constitutions.  Question remains – what interests are involved, what is the process due, and is there equal protection – my colleagues and I have litigated those questions ad infinitum, ad nauseum. 

I’d be happy to litigate against these restrictions – seems to me one’s place at an institution of higher learning is worth protecting, as well as one’s reputation, and the protections are being watered down — what was, and in some circles still is, regarded as ‘criminal’ should be treated with protections in place for criminal prosecutions.

And for private institutions, regardless of constitutional or legal protections, similar ethical/moral concerns also apply.  Why should potentially ‘criminal’ protections be watered down for some (males?), but not others?

Plenty of evidence that colleges often try to sweep problems under the rug – see, e.g., sanctions against Wazzu (WSU) for failing to adequately report sexual assaults, etc.

To my mind, smacks of Star Chambers/Inquisition, where the ‘administrators’ can have ‘special’ proceedings, out of sight of the light of day – Lux et veritas!

I actually give a number of A’s. I think it’s because I define “excel” differently. Sure, it’s “to stand out, to rise above, to surpass.” And, as you say, ”by definition, not everyone can excel. If everyone stands out, then no one does.” But I don’t think of students having to stand out or surpass other students. I think it has to do more with surpassing expectations — mine and theirs. From beginning to end, did a student rise above what he/she thought possible or what I thought that student could achieve? There is a common standard for the class, but I try to approach grades individually as well. Balance, I guess. It’ll be interesting to hear what others say.

My distribution is very similar, yellow1.

I routinely ask my students (Freshman Stats) in a little survey I give on the first day (anonymously) the following two questions:  (1) what grade do you think you will get in this class?, and (2) what % of A’s do you think, on average, a statistics professor should expect to give?.  Consistently half or more of the students say they expect to get an A.  Consistently, the average for question 2 is around 20%. 

In other words, it should be hard to get an A — except for me.  Always leads to a fun class discussion.

The attitude that time spent on task rather than excellence of the finished product is enough to earn a student an A grade seems to me to be more and more prevalent.  In fact, it isn’t just students who feel this way.  At a recent Massachusetts State Democratic Convention, a group that worked on the platform responded to thoughtful criticisms by saying that they shouldn’t have to make any revisions since they’d spent hours and hours on their project. 

Betsy Smith/Adjunct Professor of ESL/Cape Cod Community College

I said, “I think if you re-read your own e-mail, you will discover the answer to your question.”

My brother in the writing instruction struggle, check yourself.

I believe the military system of go/no-go is better than A/B/C/D/F. As professors we do not need to anoint the ones who are “standing out” against the rest. The working world will separate the men from the boys. I have a point system and a rubric (you can see my rubric and study guide, etc. here http://textontrial.blogspot.com ) and if they rack up the points, then they get an A. 
Most students in my class want As, follow the guidelines, and get As (in a writing class of 27 students, usually about 5 get Fs because they disappear, about 5 get in the C-D range, 5 get in the B range, and 12 get A or A-.) Presto! I am not in the business of playing holy judge or trying to make students jealous of each other.

If you treat As like some kind of holy grail then the students don’t learn to work hard or be good writers; they learn that the world is full of sentinels who have to be begged and flattered for a lucky break. Also, writing isn’t something where a small elite of people “excel”; it’s a practical skill that almost everyone can master. The kid who wants to feel like he’s head and shoulders above the rest has his whole life to write the Great American Novel. While he’s in my class he just has to live with the fact that other students he considers beneath him are going to get As because they learned how to compose decent, readable prose.

Maybe you can adjust your attitude and approach a little. Lighten up.

Thank you for pointing out that “excelling” doesn’t have to mean a competition with the other students – why are Americans so hung up on individual level competition as the model for everything?  

However, I would suggest another target of comparison against which the student “excels” – the content of the course itself, aka the material described in the syllabus.  If a student displays complete mastery of the course content, by getting very close to 100% of it correctly, that suggests that they’ve hit the ceiling on the course (like a student who gets 800 out of 800 on the SAT) and their knowledge surpasses the course requirements in that area.  

So in that sense, if you had a remedial English class syllabus and for some reason got enrollment that was all English-AP-score-5 students, it would be entirely reasonable to expect the entire class to get an “A” – to excel in their mastery of the course requirements.

The only time that looking at the students in comparison to each other is relevant is in judging the course itself, not the students – if there is a wide trend towards the top or bottom of mastery across most students, that suggests that there is something wrong with the course or how it is being taught.

It is funny how often I’d have to be a “Math teacher” in my Composition classes!

First, Jephthah, while I appreciate the spirit of your post, few who know me would ever feel the need to tell me to “lighten up.” In my department, I’m known as kind of a soft touch, which is fine by me.

I’ve been waiting, though, for someone to bring up rubrics. While I’m not a big fan of rubrics, per se, I understand and appreciate the way that they clarify and delineate expectations. But I also think that rubrics can be artificially limiting and make grading unnecessarily mechanical, substituting hard numbers for professional judgment. Here’s a passage that was cut from my original version of this post (which, admittedly, ran way too long):

“What I look for in an A essay. . . is one that truly
stands out from other essays I have read, not just in that course or during that
semester, but throughout my 26-year career. There are some semi-objective
criteria that distinguish an A, I think: the grammar and punctuation are nearly
flawless, the vocabulary and syntax are much more advanced than one would
expect from a first-year college student, the organization is logical and compelling,
the ideas are fresh and original, the writer’s distinctive voice is clearly
evident. But there’s also a sense in which an A paper is kind of hard to
define. Like beauty or athletic ability, you simply know it when you see it.”

Rob

I actually put something in my syllabus this semester…I tell the students the full point value of assignments, and then state “these points values are the maximum, and are rarely given for work. Just because you turn something in on time does not mean you will get full points. Please see the rubric for each assignment”. We’ll see if that changes things.

well, about science anyway.

My experience as a math instructor is that my students in college algebra need to work very hard just to get a C, and some will not pass even though they worked as hard as the A students. In this regard, math is not so different from writing; early deficits are very hard to overcome.

I have a rubric for my classes, and in one I found that the rubric was, well, too easy. Many A’s, based on the parameters I defined. So yeah, a bit of redefining of parameters on my part…

I agree wholeheartedly with this prof.  In my opinion, grades should be earned.  Being honest about one’s abilities and weaknesses is not a fault.  If a student’s transcript shows an inadequate scoring in an area, it simply means that they are not strong in that particular area, not that they are a useless person.  The A’s that are handed out like candy at the high school level are not fair to these kids.  It inflates their opinion of their own scholarship.  At that level, the A has become the new C.  You almost have to try not to get A’s. 

In the drive to produce more and more knowledge workers, we have begun to emphasize quantity over quality.  It is for this very reason that the necessary degrees have been escalated.  One only used to need a GED or high school diploma to have gainful employment.  Then it was Bachelor’s Degree.  Now it is a Master’s Degree.  If we continue down this path as we are, 20 – 30% of the population will have a doctorate, but be virtually unemployable. 

They will be “too over-qualified” (bollocks in my opinion) for everything from menial labor to aeronautical engineering and without enough work experience because they have been in school for decades.  If we are going to help advance these students who are in our care, are we not doing them a disservice if we easily give top scores?  This only places limits on the heights to which the students with the most potential can rise while boosting up those most suited to honest work only to drop them farther when their illusions are shattered. 

Continue as you are, Mr. Jenkins.  You are working to save our educational system from itself and are to be commended.

I’m with Jephthah.  College composition is a practical skill that most students SHOULD be able to master.  Telling your students up front that most of them aren’t skilled enough to meet your vague and undefined standard of “I know it when I see it” is the equivalent of telling students in an exercise class that only professional athletes can earn an A in beginning aerobics.  I’d drop that class in a heartbeat and find someone who is willing to work at the level I’m at and set defined goals that I actually can meet.  

Thanks for the kind words, arist0tle. I like being commended. It just doesn’t happen very often. (See my column on classroom rules.)

Rob

My students edit extensively, working their way through multiple drafts of each essay, but their grades are always based on the quality of the final draft. (I do give points for rough drafts that are factored into the final grade, as I explained in my last post, “Vitamin B.”) Students often, through editing, improve a failing paper to a C, or a C to a B, but most of them aren’t going to get to the A level simply by revising unless I just fix everything for them, which I’m not going to do.

But, again, that has the danger of looking like a contract with the student.  ”If X, then Y,” or “if X, then *maybe* Y,” doesn’t really sound a whole lot different in the mind of a student who has busted his/her tail trying to meet *your* expectations.  And, in the end, unless you have a departmental rubric and model for excellence, that’s all it is.  Your own rubric had better be bulletproof, and you’d better have samples of previous work to use as models.  Otherwise, you are setting yourself up.

Then again, if you want to invite grade challenges, norming sessions, accusations of arrogance from your colleagues, unflattering preconceived notions about your classes (which affect your enrollment/retention/evaluations), and eventual dismissal, then by all means, treat grading as the avenue for whatever axe you have to grind with the generation of entitlement while keeping your rubric for “excellence” as nebulous as possible and restricted to only 4 students out of 25, as though you truly have a random population sample in your class.  With career/community colleges and trade schools, you really don’t.

Sure, the attitude of entitlement bugs me too, but that doesn’t mean I need to put up yet another bulwark to excellence, because frankly there are enough obstacles standing in our students’ way, and there are more constructive alternatives.  I don’t hand out A’s like manna, but announcing stuff like  ”only 4 students can get an A on this paper” does not help.  The student who has struggled with writing in the past doesn’t really need to hear much more, and subsequently won’t try, thanks to some self-fulfilling prophecy.  There’s a balance to find.

Okay, couple of things here. You use the phrase “fix everything for them,” which implies that there is a binary with writing: fixed or broken. I don’t see student writing that way, and I certainly don’t see the revision process that way.  Maybe that’s not what you meant to say.  Pushing students to develop more, organize more, and write clearer thesis statements isn’t “fixing,” even if you’re factoring in grammar, mechanics, and spelling (which obviously have clearer “correct vs. incorrect” relationships that students can grasp more readily).

Then you say you’re “not going to do” that for them, which isn’t really what you’re being asked to do as a writing instructor anyway (regardless of how students view your role).  Besides, studies have shown that marking every error does little to help students improve as writers, so I don’t know why any experienced teacher would do that.  Students either correct everything as though you’re teaching basic math problems, or they see all that ink and switch off.  Either way, not much learning happens.  Mark the first couple of recurring errors, put a note in the margin to say, “okay, this is happening a lot, so review this and apply corrections throughout” and let them take responsibility for their progress.  Usually, my comments are focused on development, organization, and focus, not syntax/mechanics/etc.

I agree with your goal and most everyone’s reasoning here, though. Grade inflation is a direct result of entitlement, grade grubbing, and unclear expectations — but so is grade deflation.  When I started teaching, I was guilty of inflated grades, but 12 years down the line, I’ve found a kind of balance.  You don’t have to deliberately set out to give mediocre grades if you have a clear, firm rubric and models for your students.  That stuff takes care of itself.  Of course, being vague about it assures you won’t get many A’s either, but I prefer to show everyone the same path and leave it up to them to take it.  For me, I feel much safer assuming that most of my class won’t put forth the effort to achieve excellent work, rather than a kind of “no matter how hard you try, only so many people in this room can do it,” which seems unfairly presumptive by comparison.

I don’t dismiss the possibility that I’ll have an exceptional class, and every couple of years, I get one.  If a student often can improve from an F to a C in your class, why is it so rare to go from a B to an A with the instructor’s guidance?  (Easy answer: Because few students want to work that hard.)  Students are responsible for their own progress.  I don’t get grade challenges because I make the expectations clear.  Going the other way, keeping the expectations in my head or keeping the rubric nebulous (if you have one) just seems like a recipe for grade appeals, poor evaluations, and onerous norming sessions.  All for what?

With prescriptive comments, we are urging students to improve their work with the ultimate goal of excellence, not mediocrity, so for me, marking up someone’s paper usually is not the path to a C.  If you make the model and rubric available, and the students complete multiple drafts with your prescriptive comments each time, and 12 out of 25 students eventually turn in excellent final drafts of their papers (leaving aside the arguable concept of a “final” draft), then do you really force half of those excellent students down by moving the goalposts?  

Thanks for taking a stab at the big, ugly white elephant in the classroom — grade inflation! Sad to say, but I believe that grade inflation is rampant these days, and that elusive white elephant, prodded by on by the handlers in the three-ring circuses that most of us work in these days, has taken to running rough shod over and even trampling the best intentions of faculty who endeavor to teach with genuine INTEGRITY.

Speaking of “Integrity” — there’s a great book by law professor Stephen L. Carter with that title — perhaps many of you know it. Just this week I picked up that book again for another enlightening read, and didn’t come away disappointed. If you haven’t read it in a while, pick it up again, and just read Chapter Five, “The Best Student Ever.”  In the chapter, Carter examines the fallacious nature of letters of recommendation faculty routinely provide. He points out that it is impossible for a faculty member to submit two letters of recommendation, each boasting that a different candidate is the “best student ever,” and evokes the question, “So who’s lying? And how?” Carter goes on to explain that academic culture tolerates and supports the lies, because if a faculty member exercised enough courage to write truly honest appraisals, his or her students would suffer as a result — people would ask, “Just how poor is this candidate’s performance?”– when the plain truth is that they are on the top end of average, solid, dependable, definitely worth hiring, the kind of person who will probably serve the company long and well, but won’t make headline news for creative contributions to the furthering of the profession. And, that can be a very good thing. We need regular Joes and Janes in the world, who won’t high tail and run following after the next whim or creative breeze — or call from a headhunter with just a few extra bucks to wave under their noses.  Carter points out that the marketing practice of “puffery,” has pervaded the recommendation process, and from what I can see, its vapor has filled the classroom, too.

So how do we know when an “A” is really an “A” these days? Sometimes we don’t. As Carter recommends in his book, sometimes we need to go fishing on transcripts to see the kinds of grades given by “the worst professors” — according to student reports, of course. The “worst professors,” it seems, are those who want to do more than just assign grades, but those want to inspire their students, and instill in them an honest work ethic — those who take words like truth, justice and intergrity very seriously. Those who dare to care, and dare to share old-fogey wisdom on such topics as there “being more to life than just school and grades,” and “getting rewards in life that are proportonal to the effort you must expend to EARN them.”

No offense to all our animal lovers out there (I love animals, too!), but it’s time we dealt with the ugly elephant that has been trying to wrest control of our classrooms. Let’s enlist the aid of PETA  (Professors Expertly Teaching Adolescents) to rope that elephant and put it out to pasture!

I don’t know about yours, but my writing is often broken and frequently in need of fixing. I see the same thing when I moonlight as a freelance copy editor: my job in that role is to fix writing that doesn’t work. And I guess that’s what I’m saying: I don’t want to cross that line and become my students’ editor instead of their teacher. I don’t want to fix their work. I want to help them learn how to fix it themselves.

Interesting thoughts.  Some responses, in no particular order:

“But most are not excellent writers and will not become excellent writers over the course of a single semester.”  
This begs a question:  Are the students expected to achieve some kind of global excellence or the more attainable objectives of an entry-level course?  Surely you want excellence to be attainable at the ‘A’ level, maybe especially at that level, while also making clear that there is much more to learn, that excellence in the first semester course doesn’t mean one has learned all there is to know.  However, “the final grade must reflect mastery, not effort” is fair not only “at the A level” but pretty much anywhere in college and beyond.  But mastery at the ‘A’ level is not the same as mastery at higher levels.  To the high school student who asked how one becomes a great writer, Hemingway once replied that about 99% of it was discipline, sitting down often and putting pen to paper.  The other 1%, he added, was (unfortunately for would-be writers) talent. Some people, however sincerely committed, may never be excellent teachers.  But even the most excellent first year teacher would be smart to remain humble.  Some major league baseball players, all well beyond “the A level” (literally), are truly excellent.  Others succeed by making an excellent effort, grinding out a career with lesser innate talent.

A few other worthwhile questions for that first class: (1) What do you think it takes to achieve “excellence” in this class?  (2) What are you prepared to do to achieve excellence?  (3) Do you even now know of any impediment to your achieving excellence, and if so, what can you/we do about this?

White people, don’t worry – you’ve put enough mechanisms in place to ensure that a big enough proportion of those non-white people will be disenfranchised before they’re old enough to care about politics, that you won’t really lose control over the levers of power for a very long time.

That is a deplorable statement to make.  You must only strive to perpetuate stereotypes.  Instead of pulling the race card (as some are so apt to do), perhaps we can get down to the real heart of the matter:  parents.  I will be the first to admit that our education system is flawed.  This still does not negate the need for parental involvement.  It has nothing to with color, it has to do with the importance the parent places on education.  Those that want more than a minimum wage job for their children help them to succeed.  Regardless of the number of jobs they might have to work or obstacles they may face.  Lead by the example, not by ignorance.

Richar Grayson, that is a  very nice way to show respect for us oldsters…..

Besides, the birth rate counted by some outdated nineteenth century racial categories is irrelevant.  People in general have lost “control over the levers of power” some time ago.  The levers are held by corporate entities not definable by “race” or nationalities.  These entities  have absolutely no national loyalties…..  So yes, being called grandma and grandpa by young people does help to humanize a sadly dehumanized world…..

MBELVADI, how exactly will people of color such as Asian Americans  become  disenfranchised (before they’re old enough to care about politics) since they are have greater education, greater wealth as a whole, etc. than the evil whitewhite people?   

Reinforcing the comments of 11144703 I also have wondered why Asian Americans as they increasingly succeed in this nation seem to be dropped from the discussion on challenges facing minorities rather than looked to as role models for achievement and examples of how this nation continues to be a land of significant opportunity for those who are disciplined and work hard to pursue it. In many states over 50% of our non Asian minorities are dropping out of a free high school education

EM … last I checked, professional basketball wasn’t a major anywhere.  And if it were, the gainful employment statistics would be hideous!  Maybe the five from Kentucky aren’t worrying about a job this year, but the vast majority of college basketball players aren’t going pro.

Jim Parcels did a study on hockey players in Ontario (http://www.omha.net/flash.asp?page_id=242) Of the roughly 30,000 kids in the 1975 cohort who played hockey on some level, SIX played in the NHL long enough to qualify for a pension (roughly 5 years).  And 1975 was considered a strong year in Ontario hockey.  You are talking astronomical odds.  Given fewer roster slots in the NBA than the NHL (and the higher popularity in the recent past), the odds are even worse.

All Kentucky’s program has done is taken full advantage of the NBA’s age/school rule for their own benefit with little thought to the players (but “we are a players-first program” he says…).

The question to me related to this note is why on earth a school would agree to play Kentucky only at Kentucky or on a neutral court.  Kudos to Indiana for calling them out and refusing such an arrangement.  Calipari’s rationale is ridiculous and shallow.  He doesn’t want his young kids playing in a hostile environment… poor John.

What is “not fair to the players” is that their entire attendance at college is a completely undisguised sham.  These kids are not and never will be at Kentucky to get an education.  They are there to “go pro.”

Isn’t the reason for people to go to college to “go pro” in something?  If you wanted to go to college to be a lawyer, you would go to Harvard because it is a top law school.  If you wanted to be a doctor, you would go somewhere with a top medical school. So, these athletes that are forced to go to college for a year by the NBA are going to a college that can help them to succeed in “going pro”, just like every other student. 

The best suggestion I have heard to help this issue is to create some type of major that is geared toward student athletes that have great potential to go pro. Make it an associate degree that focuses on the business side of professional athletics so that when they do leave school to become pro, they are more prepared for that world.

Last I heard, to become a lawyer by way of Harvard, you actually have to graduate with a degree.  Same situation for medical school.  Are you suggesting that students headed for the NBA will also have to graduate with a degree?

In a way, yes I am saying that. Why not be able to graduate with some sort of Associate degree in professional athletics? If this is the direction that university sports are headed in, train the student athletes to succeed at that level on both the athletic side and the business side.  Many professional athletes go broke because they are unable to handle the business side. If you want these athletes to also be students, give them an option to get a degree that will help in their chosen career path.

 Exactly! And furthermore, Calipari has been one of the most vocal coaches against the current rules, calling out the NBA and the current NCAA president repeatedly. In addition, he celebrates his four-year graduates just as much as his NBA players. Take a look at his facebook page where he raves about Eloy Vargas and Darius Miller for graduating. Finally, the best evidence is that all of his past players love him and are committed to him, regardless of whether they’ve gone pro or not. Sounds players-first to me and sounds like a pretty decent fellow.

You need to look up your facts on those one-and-done players. Only one has not completed their spring semester at Kentucky and he has since said that he wishes that he would have. That player was Daniel Orton. If you would look at this year’s team, you will see that they all finished out the spring semester and the projected #1 player in the draft ended up with a GPA of over a 3.0 (I can’t remember exactly, but 3.6 keeps coming to mind.)

Or it could be that Crean was afraid of playing on a neutral court because he knew he needed the home court advantage to have any chance. Don’t get me wrong, IU will be much improved next year. But, I’d place my money on Calipari for long-term success over Crean.

“Were founded to educate the citizenry.” So whats not going on in this process? “To advance knowledge.” Preperation for whatever their future holds for that individual, not our egos. I think sometimes as faculty members and administrators we talk about development, but we don’t know how to act when its not administered under the traditional format. We love to play high and mighty. We enjoy looking down on those who do not register in our same thoughts. Instead of making the main thing the main thing. And the main thing involves preparing our students to follow thier passions. Preparing them for an opportunity of life long learning. And preparing them for their next step. And if you believe it or not, that is the opportunity we have standing before us.

He had no knowledge or control over what happened with Camby. And with Rose, the NCAA cleared him to play for Memphis and then reversed course only after Rose had already left for the NBA. How is Calipari supposed to plan for that? You can hate him for his success all you want. But, there’s no evidence that he has been aware of or participated in these major violations.

You have to love it.   All Calipari is doing is simply acknowledging that in D1 basketball, the notion of student-athlete is an inconvenient fiction that interferes with the minor league role his teams now play for the NBA.

I am sympathetic to your suggestion that there could be courses of study that could prove beneficial to athletes who intend to pursue careers in athletics or physical education.  Future athletic trainers, coaches, sports agents, etc., can avail themselves of academic programs or specific courses available in various colleges and universities that will help them realize their aspirations.  However, I believe it is unlikely that all those colleges and universities that currently serve as feeder schools for pro basketball and pro football (I assume this is mostly what we’re talking about) are going to institute a degree program as you propose, particularly when, as you suggest, it would remain an “option” to get a degree, as for “athletes that are forced to go to college for a year by the NBA.”  Considering the situation as whole, I believe we both wish it were otherwise. (This is out of order as I was unable to reply to your reply to my first message.)

Indiana doesn’t want to end the series.  They want it more than ever now.  They have been in basketball hell and climbed out of it. They have brought themsleves back from from near NCAA death and they have done it legitimately and academically. The team had an academic GPA of right around a 3.0 this past year.

They want to prove that a team doing it the right way can beat a team doing it the professional way!!!