• Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Previous

Next

Online, People Learn Best from Virtual ‘Helpers’ That Resemble Them

March 3, 2011, 5:36 pm

Courtesy of Lori Foster Thompson

Turns out looks and personality still count in online learning.

That’s the finding of a study on how people’s perception and performance in online training is affected by the appearance and communication style of online learning “helpers,” or virtual agents that pop up on a screen and guide people through a program.

Some of the earliest uses of such programs have been with younger students. One program used an online helper named Herman to help students identify different types of plants, says the study’s lead author, Tara Behrend, an assistant professor of organizational sciences at George Washington University.  She says online helpers typically serve as coaches or mentors, urging a participant through a program, rather than as an instructor.

Her study, which is forthcoming in the journal Computers in Human Behavior, involved 257 people who encountered different kinds of helpers. They reported being more engaged by online helpers that resembled them—in race and gender—than by ones that did not. Participants also learned more from helpers that measured success the same way they did. Some people judge their performance compared to the rest of a group (top 10 percent, for example), while others judge against their own previous performance (better than the last time). In the study, matching those styles resulted in better learning.

The study findings suggest that organizations using online helpers would  serve learners better by personalizing the appearance and communication style of the helpers to match individual users, Ms. Behrend says.

“It’s important to remember that one size doesn’t fit all,” she says.

Effective helpers can also make the experience more social, says the forthcoming article’s coauthor, Lori Foster Thompson, an associate professor of psychology at North Carolina State University.

“That is one of the issues with online learning, that it can be kind of lonely,” she says. “If these agents are designed well, it can be a way to mitigate that.”

Improving the experience of users is important, she says, because online training programs, such as those used by companies to introduce their employees to new computer programs, often have low completion rates.

A related study by the researchers, whose results are not yet published, indicates that people liked and learned more from online trainers when given the chance to design them. And in yet another study, whose results are also unpublished, the researchers found that the attractiveness of avatars, virtual stand-ins for real people, had an impact on hiring decisions during virtual interviews.

This entry was posted in Research, Teaching, Uncategorized, Virtual Worlds. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • pippi

    But how would you get your site to “detect” the characteristics of the user and show the appropriate helper? I guess you would have to let users choose a helper from several.

  • kphagen

    This study seems similar to those done by Clifford Nass and his team. I’ve just been reading about how people prefer working with a computer that matches their personality style in his book “The Man Who Lied to His Laptop” with Corina Yen as second author. See also “Transformed Facial Similarity as a Political Cue: A Preliminary Investigation” by
    Bailenson, Jeremy N.; Garland, Philip; Iyengar, Shanto; and Yee, Nick
    Political Psychology. Vol 27(3), Jun 2006, pp. 373-385 in which people felt more favorable toward a political candidate whose digital face had been slightly morphed with their own features.

  • readkc

    This is a really interesting story. Thanks to Ben Wieder for featuring this.

  • j3lane

    So how do I arrange to get Tom Hanks as my online helper?

  • teachercontinue

    Turns out looks and personality still count in online learning- interesting concept. Interesting concept- could use this at my class at California Lutheran University for educators called Independent Travel Study.

  • aperezferguson

    Thanks for the posting. This reinforces previous research on the compatibility of effective mentors in business and learning environments [Gallegos, 2007]. In the realm of online skills this compatibility is crucial for mid career & older students.
    Anita Perez Ferguson, PhD
    Fielding Graduate University

  • arrive2__net

    People seem to be wired in such a way that they are more likely to help ingroup members (http://wps.prenhall.com/hss_aronson_socpsych_6/64/16429/4205880.cw/-/4205927/index.html) who are likely to resemble them. So maybe they are also wired to be more likely to accept help from the same kinds of people, even if the people are synthetic, simulations.

    Bernard Schuster
    Arrive2.net
    Twitter.com/arrive2_net

  • lwjboyd

    Most interesting and yet frightening. What is the impact for educators to strive to have the learner presented with instruction from those who are like the learner? When will the learner ever be expected to accept information from those who are NOT like himself or herself? What happens to our aims for multiculturalism and diversity then?

  • lwjboyd

    Most interesting and yet frightening. What is the impact for educators to strive to have the learner presented with instruction from those who are like the learner? When will the learner ever be expected to accept information from those who are NOT like himself or herself? What happens to our aims for multiculturalism and diversity then?

  • 5768

    Yes, and young students like young professors. Sounds like the basis of age discrimination, lookism, and all manner of biases that inform the uneducated and narcissistic.

  • 5768

    One more comment–a study has shown that kids like cereal more when it’s packaged with the faces of cartoon characters on the box. Time to hire Daffy Duck and Mickey Mouse to teach in the classroom?

  • electronicmuse

    Uh, we’re in violent agreement . . . the comments here are obvious? They don’t seem to relate to my comments . . .

  • electronicmuse

    Yeah, I think projecting on my views has occurred as well . . . katisumas seems to “answer” ideas that were never stated . . . 

  • whitakal

    With the focus on character formation or policing sexual behavior, I think most of these comments, and even the post itself to some degree, miss the core issue at stake around eros and the university. Because of the sex-drenched culture we live in, most students come to college with an eros that has, so to speak, prematurely ripened. Jocelyn Elders and her fellows have taught their lessons: for these students, eros is just sex, meaning a matter of personal, physical pleasure. Show-off professors trying to ”awaken” students to sexual complexities are old news. These exhibitions do not shock students out of a supposed suburban, repressed existence: rather, they merely reinforce clumsy cultural norms about eros. The same goes for campus sex codes, which again reduce eros to a physical transaction aimed at personal pleasure negotiated between consenting adults. The point these codes miss is that harm occurs not just when an act takes place without consent. Harm can been done (to both parties) in consenting acts. But such harm falls outside the radar of the reductionist liberal psychology animating today’s Angelos. How does all this affect the classroom? As Allan Bloom–no stranger to eros’ true complexity–argued, no eros, no philosophy, no science, no art or poetry or much else of any true importance. Professors should not yield this argument to student-life administrators with second-rate minds. They should themselves militate against the pervasive porn culture, not just to protect students from supposed rapists in their midst but so that they become better readers, writers, and thinkers. But instead most teachers acede to or actively support the culture, especially in their would-be “transgressive” poses.

    Keith Whitaker, http://www.wisecounselresearch.org

  • qwerty_asdf

    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?

  • jffoster

    You all have evidently enjoyed your righteous indignation at Professor Vedder but you might want to have a look at this story on CHE’s news listings at what has just happened when a private sectarian university played fast and loose with due process.  Here’s the reference:

    http://chronicle.com/article/Jury-Verdict-in-Sex-Assault/128884/

  • chuckkle

    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

  • skmarie17

    Thank you, Professor Vedder, for your courage.

  • 12080243

    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. 

  • frankschmidt

    In Vedder’s Golden Age, deans could dismiss a student at their own discretion.   Perhaps he would prefer that system?

  • pkbrandon

    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).

  • skmarie17

    I’m afraid pkbrandon might be upset he was not mentioned by name in Vedder’s penultimate paragraph.

  • abednars

    “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…

  • marka

    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!

  • pollaeti

    Thanks to Marka for the learned and valued remarks.  An added point I would want to make to pkbrandon is that bringing a suit for defamation would require him to meet the burden of “clear and convincing” evidence (which, in practice, is virtually identical to “beyond a reasonable doubt”).  The whole of his future livelihood is ruined on the barest of net probabilities, i.e., 0.001% or less, while he has to prove his case with near certainty–in a case where the evidence is itself inclusive. 

    Include in this the view that prosecuting defamation sends a “chilling” message to possible victims, and it is no surprise that successful defamation suits in not-guilty cases of rape allegations is virtually nil.  So, the ability to ruin one’s life on an accusation is quite easy under this level of burden, but defense is all but impossible.

  • robjenkins

    I think, too, that there is a collective aspect to grading–collective in terms of the faculty, I mean. If I’m constantly assigning students A’s, and then they’re moving on to other teachers’ classes and getting C’s (or worse), then there’s something wrong systemically. It might be, I suppose, that I’m right and my colleagues are all wrong, but I think the safest thing would be to assume that I’m the one who’s a little off in my grading and adjust my expectations accordingly. No doubt that’s what you meant by “a common standard.”

    One of the best things we do in our department (and I’m sure a lot of departments do something similar) is to ask all the full-time faculty to participate in evaluating exit essays for our developmental classes. These grading marathons are always preceded by a “normalizing” session, in which we look at essays from previous terms and discuss what we would have given them and why. I think that goes a long way toward helping us maintain that “common standard.”

  • robjenkins

    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

  • robjenkins

    No. I’d expect you, as a science grad, to be smarter.

  • missoularedhead

    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.

  • chattahoochee

    I don’t believe that students are pitted one against another, fighting to get to the top of a pyramid. However, just surpassing their often abysmally low expectations and assumptions of college level writing isn’t an option. Like Rob, I teach composition at a local community college (across town from his, actually) and my students always assume if they just “do” the work, they have earned an A. No one has ever actually spoken to them about QUALITY. The result is students who are woefully un-prepared for the demands of college or a workplace.

    My standard for an A essay tends to be decided with the following questions in mind: “Is it really excellent, college-level work?” and “If I award this student an A, am I going to be embarrassed when I run into his English 1102 teacher in the hall?”

    -Willena

  • bristol64

    well, about science anyway.

  • kilbysl

    On the “I worked hard issue” I try to remind students that hard work is only one component of the equation and will only get them so far.  I try to point out real life examples where no matter how hard you work the decision is made based on something else.  The example I’m using this year is we are currently trying to decide on a Republican nominee for US President, not all of them will be the winner no matter how hard they all work, which can also be extended into the fall semester as only one candidate will be allowed to live in the White House no matter how hard the other candidates work to get there.

    I also try to point out to students that C is what is considered average, that B is abiove average, and that A is excellent, well above average.  I also try to remind them that a C or B is not a bad grade that if they worked hard and did the best they could that they should be proud of that grade, not all classes, subject areas are easy for everyone and that while they may struggle in my math class, there is a subject area out there that they will do better in than I will be able to do.  You can’t be an A student in everything (regardless of how you define A) and that your hard work counts in that you know that the grade you earned was the best that you could do at that time, given the circumstances that were happening at that time.

  • arist0tle

    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.

  • jcking75

    How does the revision process factor into your assessment of their mastery? I can see few students getting A’s or even B’s on first drafts, but after the third or fourth draft, with a combination of peer comments and my own comments through the process, students develop a level of expectation — and rightly so — that by the third or fourth draft, the paper has to be good because they’ve followed all the comments received thus far. Our written comments, be they surface issues or much more involved, become the rubric: “Develop this thought,” “Add more detail here,” “Needs a stronger thesis/conclusion” become a kind of contract in the mind of the student: If I do these things, then the paper is an A.  The trick is explaining that no, that’s not the case, while showing them further areas for improvement (all the while not discouraging them from bothering to revise even further).  If students don’t choose to revise, then they can’t possibly excel. But if they choose to revise, then there’s an expectation that they’ll get to “excellent.”

  • ychumanities

    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.  

  • manoflamancha

    Simply say, “with care and detailed revisions, which I have pointed out, this paper might move from a C grade to at best a B grade”. That settles early in the piece any speculation regarding expectations. Read the post by AristOle, and memorize it. 

  • robjenkins

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

    Rob

  • jcking75

    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.

  • jcking75

    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.

  • jcking75

    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?  

  • silverquille37

    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!

  • silverquille37

    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!

  • silverquille37

     
    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 integrity 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 proportional 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!

  • robjenkins

    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.

  • rebhill

    I agree with the “abysmally low expectations” explanation of why students think that they should all get As. A degree of friendly competitiveness among students is healthy.
       I had a professor in college who after the first paper, took three papers (with names cut off) representing A, B and C and put them on reserve in the library for our perusal. It helped the students understand the grades much better because they  also “know it when they see it.” I think in many cases, it’s not hubris, but low self-esteem,  lack of exposure to higher standards, and then the belief that people reaching those standards are simply in another, inaccessible world that leads to these problems.  We can give them models of great essay writers all day, but the majority don’t have the self-esteem to imagine that what they do for class will ever meet the standard set by the authors whose work we ask them to read as “models”. George Orwell said you have to be a bit of an egomaniac to write. I think it’s true. Most really great writers got that way because they had the hubris to compare themselves accomplished, famous, professional writers. Most students don’t do this, but they DO compare themselves to other students. Students at community colleges often think that they should be held to lower standards than students at elite private schools, but I used to make the point to my students that if we do that, we put them at a disadvantage to the students who graduate from those schools when they compete with them for jobs.This is especially true for writing students, given everything we’ve read by employers about the importance of writing and critical thinking skills in many of today’s jobs.
         I taught comp. for years and heard people say that we have to meet students “where they are.” We also have to show them how far they could go, and if we give them “As” for just doing the basics we fail them. They think that because they got an “A” that they have already done all there was to do. They don’t even know that other people are meeting higher standards all the time – and this puts them at a tremendous disadvantage. It drives me crazy to see the total disjuncture between graduate and undergraduate training in universities. Because of the insane job market, grad students & professors are held to higher and higher standards of publication, excellent teaching, etc. while simultaneously a consumerist model in undergraduate education makes us afraid to hold our students to any standards at all.
       In all fields but education, which supposedly prepares people to compete for jobs, we understand the need to compete. No one would fault the coach of a team for showing his players what really good players do and suggest that they emulate them. The same is true for musicians. I used to tell my students that writing is a skill just like playing tennis or the guitar – lots of technical skill is required, & there are lots of rules to be learned. Of course you can’t expect all people to be world-class musicians, but it is helpful to know what world class musicians do when you are learning to play a musical instrument. Students themselves adopt high standards and are able to engage in informed, critical discussions about the varied talents, skills, and techniques of musicians, dancers, actors, television and film writers, photographers, artists, and especially sports figures all the time.   Why can’t we ask that they learn how to understand writing as a craft that requires dedication and inspiration in the same way? I think treating writing as simply some “technical” and easily mastered practice without any need for creativity or passion contributes to students’ lack of interest in learning to do it well.
     
       

  • baboomr2

    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.

  • baboomr2

    Have to question the reasoning here.  Are there no standards agreed upon by the department, the college, some basic expectations?

  • baboomr2

    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?

  • baboomr2

    Agree with the above that there’s some questionable reasoning here.  Competition is hardly unique to Americans.  Ask the Chinese.  Also, what would it suggest if a remedial (commonly called “developmental” nowadays) class were filled with students who all scored 5 on the AP exam?  Either the exam or the college’s placement system is suspect.  And also, I imagine most writing teachers would question the flawed reference to achieving “complete mastery” and getting 100% correct, as if composition is like a spelling test where such perfection is possible.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/KAAV7IHSQSGCESM2WO52KWITNM Zoran

    They are ignoring Asians because they like mediocrity, they are looking for more reasons to dumb everything down even more. It bothers them that Asians are smart and hard working, it smacks of “elite”, an abomination for the ultra liberal nutcases in academia. For them stupid is good and smart is bad.

  • mbelvadi

    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.

  • rogerclegg

    As the United States becomes increasingly multiethnic and multiracial, the more untenable it becomes to have a system in which our institutions (like universities) sort people according to skin color and what country their ancestors came from, treating some better and others worse on the basis of which silly little box is checked.  E pluribus unum, now more than ever.

  • slaclair

    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.

  • 11231962

    This is no big deal.  Just expand the definition of “white,” which has always been porous and vague.  Schools, employers and government should encourage mixed-race adults and children to identify as “white.”  “White” is more multiracial than you realize.  Just look at the games we play with the Hispanic classification – “white” for some things and “minority” for others.

  • http://who-will-kiss-the-pig.blogspot.com Richard Grayson

    There is a big disconnect in a state like Arizona, where 83% of the people 65 and over are white, but only 43% of the people 18 and under are white.  There are suggestions that our Republican conservative legislature is defunding education because the student population no longer looks like them or the people who vote them into office.  I think this generation gap accounts for some of the weird politics on immigration and other issues in Arizona and other states.

    On the other hand, as an older person here said, it’s hard to generalize.  As he said, “Some of these young nonwhite people call the old white people names.  I know some of them call me and my wife Grandpa and Grandma.”

  • 11144703

    Zoran, good post.  I agree with you except for: “For them stupid is good and smart is bad.”  Yes, but only when applied to Asians since it subverts their perpetual view of people of color as hopelessly oppressed by the whitewhite people. That’s why they love to bring up Pacific Islanders who admittedly perform not as well as mainland Asians.   In that once instance too many of the far Left celebrate people of color who perform poorly, although the far Left ironically thinks of itself as the most anti-racist.  

  • katisumas

    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

    Hmmm, I thought Grayson’s older person was making the point that some of the non-white young people were his ACTUAL grandchildren – that is, that the white children of the retired white generation were intermarrying with the non-white population.  Richard, which is it?

  • 11144703

    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?   

  • mbelvadi

    The history tying felon disenfranchisement to racial discrimination is very well documented and can easily be traced right back to Reconstruction. Some states’ legislators spoke quite openly about the need to use felon disenfranchisement to suppress the Black vote and they shaped which felonies qualified accordingly:
    http://racism.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1227:voting08-1&catid=70&Itemid=185

  • mjricklefs

    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

  • tdr75

    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.”

  • dlws8607

     It sounds like electronicmuse is an athletic supporter with no grasp of what faculty at universities do or the supposed role of athletics at universities.  If EM’s assertion is true, we should discontinue almost all athletic departments based on the number of students who fail to gain employment in professional athletics.

    Howl away, all of you whiny socialist (at least when it comes to athletic entertainment) athletic supporters, who don’t have a clue about what universities are for and proudly demonstrate this.

  • kessingerw1

    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.

  • 11179102

    tdr75, I appreciate your comments but believe they would support Calipari’s position – he is not recruiting every kid, only the top 3 or 4 high school players each year that are already committed to a “1-and-done” collegiate experience and are already screened as NBA-material.  The majority of Kentucky’s players that appear to get playing time are indeed looking to play professionally.  Given this, the Kentucky model is player-focused in this strange way.
     
    As you say “All Kentucky’s program has done is taken full advantage of the NBA’s age/school rule for their own benefit…” You are correct.  Give Calipari this – he has created his model by following the rules provided by the NCAA and NBA and built in broad daylight.  We don’t have to like it, but reality is what it is.   In this light, Calipari is not the problem, just a symptom of the problem. 

    In the end, the Kentucky situation is a symptom of the professionalization of D1 athletics and could also include the issues of conference realignment and positioning of high-profile programs to maximize TV exposure and media contracts.  Someday there needs to be a meeting of the minds among the NFL, NBA and NCAA on whatever farm system deemed needed for our sports-crazed society.  Then colleges and universities can return to their primary mission of education for its students who choose to participate in athletics.

  • rcsloan

    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?

  • kaesser08

    11179102, you are correct.  A lot has been said about Calipari but for the most part he is working within the rules of the system (NCAA and NBA) and is doing what he is hired to do, recruit high tier talent to be competitive at the highest level.  Other top programs, including Duke, are losing players after one year to try their skills at the professional ranks.  Thus, I find the selection of Calipari as the target of this groups anger to be misguided.  

  • kessingerw1

    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.

  • fiscalwiz

    Kentucky players with NBA intentions — the one and done guys — attend one semester of classes and, assuming they are meeting athletic expectations, don’t go to classes in the spring semester.  They have eligibility based on the first semester and registration for the spring and that is all that matters.  So Kentucky should award an associates degree in basketball on the basis of one semester worth of academic performance.  That ought to handle it.

    If the NCAA wants to change the dynamic so that its schools actually play with students, make athletic scholarships 5 year deals for the students, rather than the one year guarantees they now are, and do not allow schools to award a new scholarship until the student initially awarded it has graduated from some university or until 5 years have elapsed.  That would bring a bit of student-athlete back into the system, should the NCAA care about that.

  • 22266017

     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.

  • wisensale

    So should we be shocked by this article? Just read Taylor Branch’s article in The Atlantic last fall. Then think of Fred Friendly’s comment when he was at CBS: “Television is making so much money being bad, it can’t afford to be good.” Just change a few words in that sentence and apply it to college sports and the point is made.

  • wisensale

    So should we be shocked by this article? Just read Taylor Branch’s article in The Atlantic last fall. Then think of Fred Friendly’s comment when he was at CBS: “Television is making so much money being bad, it can’t afford to be good.” Just change a few words in that sentence and apply it to college sports and the point is made.

  • kessingerw1

    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.)

  • cmmoore1

    Calipari got “stunned” when his UK team came to IU in December 2011.  What he is really inferring here is that he doesn’t want his home court winning record broken.  He doesn’t want the better and improved Indiana basketball team with players who are staying in school and pursuing degrees to come down to Lexington this December 2012 and go into “his house” and beat them.

    So to make it look legitimate he wraps in a package that includes neutral sites for everyone that’s a non-conference team and calls it practice for the NCAA tournament.  I guess that’s all part of the practice for being a professional play too.  You get to practice how to travel around.  Just add that to your schedule of taking classes.  I hope they are easy classes so they can get on with the profession of being a basketball player.

  • robbie1

    11179102  wrote: … “Give Calipari this – he has created his model by following the rules provided by the NCAA and NBA and built in broad daylight.  We don’t have to like it, but reality is what it is.   In this light, Calipari is not the problem, just a symptom of the problem.” …

    I beg to differ with you on this: 

    The University of Kentucky, a major state university and educational institution, actually has the basketball team, not the coach. Kentucky is part of the NCAA and as such is obligated and expected to support and follow its rules, NOT  HAVE  A COACH FOLLOWING HIS MODEL. 
    Calipari following NCAA rules…since WHEN? Look at his record in the NCAA which has solid evidence of NOT FOLLOWING RULES, bringing PENALTIES upon numerous colleges and universities who hired him to perform as a professional (not as an unethical practitioner following HIS MODEL ), and having his record as a coach changed (since he’s been at Kentucky) by deletion of SUCCESSES he enjoyed when NOT FOLLOWING RULES. 
    It is a shame that a would-be-great University employs such a person.

    Numerous other coaches can win games and championships with elite players, so why is Calipari still a college coach when he does not respect or follow collegiate athletic rules? 

    “Pre pro, one and done” basketball players do not belong in student athletic programs at such institutions. This has become accepted because of the regrettable decline in American values. There seems to be just one value now: money.
    This is the change needed: Universities with athletic programs which recruit and play “pre pros” who are not and do not want to be students should have to pay taxes as entertainment enterprises. 

    Associate degrees may be awarded by the University of Kentucky (not sure if community colleges in their state are part of the UK system), but most major universities grant bachelors, masters and doctoral degrees. The “one and done” guys won’t be there long enough to earn even an associate degree, which involves taking courses and attending classes for two years, usually. In many states, associate degrees are awarded at community college level, not the major universities with big athletic programs. 
    The great universities (as Kentucky is intended to be) were founded to educate the citizenry (greatly needed in this country), to advance knowledge through research and to provide public service which fosters the progress and well being of their states and communities. 

    How do “pre pro, one and done” athletes relate to fulfillment of those purposes?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=33902806 Gerald Harris

    “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.

  • rescomp

    It’s pretty interesting reading all the posts from those trying to find a rationale for Calipari’s behavior. Oh he’s playting within the rules, but let’s see what cost Kentucky will eventually pay from associating itself with him. Calipari will leave Kentucky in shambles as he did with UMass and Memphis. This is not a good guy. He’s a snake oil salesman who comes to town, makes a few million, and leaves you far worse off than you were before he arrived. Sure, you’ll get some temporary thrill, but it all catches up to you for hiring him — and with any luck it will catch up with him.

  • 22266017

    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.

  • pianiste

    “‘No other program is losing five or six players a year’ to the NBA, he wrote on his blog. ‘This is a players-first program, and you cannot put a young team into situations that are not fair to the players.’”

    Hello? The reason that Calipari loses a half-dozen players to the NBA each year is because he recruits players who are ready for the NBA after one or two years of college. And when those go pro, he recruits more. John Wall and DeMarcus Cousins went pro and were replaced by Anthony Davis (2011-2012 college player of the year), who will be replaced by another one-and-done star. If anybody has cause to end the series, it’d be Indiana, which every year plays against a Kentucky team that’s more NBA D-League (probably better) than NCAA.

    And as for Calipari’s record of good deeds, his supporters ought to review his record, especially that at UMass.

    Kentucky, which had a pretty good pro basketball team, the Colonels, in the ABA, lost it in the merger. Since then Kentucky and Louisville have filled that bill.

  • cwinton

    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.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/YMTXAXV55SZZXSI7BIXKJZLESA Mia

    my roomate’s half-sister makes $69/hr on the computer. She has been fired for 10 months but last month her paycheck was $14883 just working on the computer for a few hours. Read more on this web site CashLazy.c&#111m 

  • cmmoore1

    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!!!