This is an archived page. Images and links on this page may not work. Please visit the main page for the latest updates.

 
 
 
Read my book, TEACHING BEAUTY IN DeLILLO, WOOLF, AND MERRILL (Palgrave Macmillan; forthcoming), co-authored with Jennifer Green-Lewis. VISIT MY BRANCH CAMPUS AT INSIDE HIGHER ED





UD is...
"Salty." (Scott McLemee)
"Unvarnished." (Phi Beta Cons)
"Splendidly splenetic." (Culture Industry)
"Except for University Diaries, most academic blogs are tedious."
(Rate Your Students)
"I think of Soltan as the Maureen Dowd of the blogosphere,
except that Maureen Dowd is kind of a wrecking ball of a writer,
and Soltan isn't. For the life of me, I can't figure out her
politics, but she's pretty fabulous, so who gives a damn?"
(Tenured Radical)

Saturday, August 25, 2007

Scathing Online Schoolmarm:
The Movement to Make Football
an Academic Discipline Grows



Over at UD's branch campus, we've already considered one argument in favor of making football a university major (the post's title is The Oregon Trial). Here's another, from Massa Saban's plantation:


'Not All College Education is In the Classroom

There is at least one aspect of this Hoover High School investigation that does not seem in doubt: At least one grade was changed, and that grade change enabled a football player to become eligible to play at the college level.

Josh Chapman apparently missed being eligible under NCAA minimum standards by the narrowest of margins.

Unfortunately for Chapman and Alabama, being "barely" ineligible is kind of like being pregnant: Either you are or you aren't. And Chapman, according to the correct transcript, wasn't.

That's the problem with having standards. [There's a refreshing village-idiot quality to this piece... That's the problem with having standards...] The NCAA has a minimum standard that is supposed to draw the line that determines whether an athlete has a reasonable chance to do the work necessary to get a college degree.

But like most such standards, the numbers are arbitrary. [Everything's subjective.] I've known athletes who graduated near the top of their high school class who struggled in college, and others who were accepted as "special admissions" - in the days when schools could take one or two athletes who didn't meet minimum standards - who wound up becoming outstanding students. It often depends on what they go to college for. [Each case is special. Everything's arbitrary. You wouldn't want to consult graduation statistics, grades, test scores, and shit like that.]

I do not know Chapman, so I can't speak to his motivation for attending college. [His total fuckupery as a high school student tells you nothing.] But I have met many athletes whose primary interest in attending college was to get an education not in the classroom but in football or basketball. These athletes' ambition was to play sports at the highest level for as long as possible. [So why did they go to college, where they have, like, classrooms?]



Is that really so wrong? No less than Princeton Athletics Director Gary Walters made the argument last spring that participation in athletics should be given the same status as playing in the band, or performing drama, or getting a degree in art - all endeavors in which students can take classes and get academic credit. Shouldn't football players, Walters seems to suggest, get some kind of academic credit for playing football? [You haven't yet told us why playing football is equivalent to academic training in the arts. And nobody gets a degree for playing in the band.]

Walters quoted Jon Veach, a starting tailback on the Princeton football team who wrote a paper that said: "The reason athletes put so much time and dedication into athletics is because the athletes do not view varsity athletics as simply an extracurricular activity but rather a vital part of their life and an intense learning experience. I have been an athlete since I was eight years old, and I can honestly say that the summation of my athletic experiences to this point has prepared me for the hard times of my life better than any other experience. Varsity athletics are imbedded with an abundant number of life lessons, values, and striking comparisons to the real world. I believe so strongly in these values that I feel varsity athletes should be given some type of academic credit for the countless hours of training and learning." [To be sure, a cursory reading of this blog -- or your daily news feed -- reveals the profound values college and professional sports imbed in so many of their participants. Glance at a few headlines to grasp the life lessons our sports heroes have absorbed... UD proposes that rather than make football an arts performance major, we make it an Ethics major.]

Of course, playing at Princeton is a far cry from playing at Auburn or Alabama. And the potential for abuse in rewarding academic credit for athletics - or even the idea of creating majors based on athletic participation - gives academicians the willies. [What's the matter with these dour academicians? Don't worry! Be happy!]

But if playing football is why some kids go to college, and the ability to play football is the primary reason many colleges award scholarships (and accept minimum academic standards in return), then is Walters' idea really so far off base?' [Again, refreshing. Admits that some football players only go to college to play football. The solution to this isn't to change college into a football training facility. It is to find a place to stash these guys -- far, far away from colleges -- until they can play on professional teams.]

Labels: