Should North Carolina discontinue the phrase "The Carolina Way"

[Lumpy 2]

That's just not true and it's the kind of sensationalism that's run amok regarding our situation. Those athletes had every opportunity to enroll in education, Pre law, drama or any other major of their choosing. They chose to go the route they did. Now, don't take that comment to mean that I support an institution offering phony majors and degrees. But pretty much every former athlete that I've heard speak to this issue has stated the same thing - a student athlete gets out what they put in. If you want to coast at any school, you can. If you want to pursue a more demanding educational experience, you can do that too. The onus is on the student. Y'all will argue that "18 year old kids can't be counted on to make those decisions and that's why athletic departments have counselors and the like". I say BS. First of all, at 18, one is an adult. You have to grow up sometime and taking responsibility for your future career path is a good way to start. Secondly, these student athletes should have someone in their life they count on to help them make decisions. If they don't, then those student athletes have to grow up a little faster. But y'all know the deal here. These ball players all think they're going on to play professionally. Only a few go to college for a "real" college experience. I know it's fun for y'all to make it sound like Carolina "took advantage of these poor, uninformed, minority teenagers" but where's the personal accountability?

I went to college. Most of y'all probably did too. Did you have someone making your decisions? Probably not. But for argument's sake, let's say that during your freshman year your academic advisor suggested you pursue a degree in Statistics. You hate statistics. Are you just going to say, "Oh well, I guess I'm doing statistics because that's what someone told me to do."? No. You took matters into your own hands. You told them what you were going to major in. You made that decision. You might have consulted with your parents, a mentor or an old high school teacher. Or you might have made that decision alone. I did. Granted, I didn't and most of you probably didn't play a sport on scholarship. But the decision is still the player's decision to make. But these players aren't looking for an education. Let's be real about that. Karl Anthony Towns seems like a very bright kid and a good student. But he wasn't looking for an education. He handled his business while he was there and for that he should be applauded. But don't act like he has a real interest in developing an in depth understanding of any one area that he plans to make a career of.

And I don't know about y'all, but I didn't learn my trade in college. I learned a lot in college. But it wasn't because of any curriculum. I learned cooperative learning. I learned time management. I learned interpersonal and social skills. But as far as my career (Human Services), I've learned everything I know from 20 years of experience in the field. I guess some careers rely on schooling - medical field, law and maybe a few others. But many jobs don't rely on schooling. They rely on experience to teach. One of my duties in my position is to hire people. What their GPA was in college is of no concern to me. Hell, their major doesn't really matter. What matters most to me when I'm hiring is the applicant's ability and willingness to learn. Also, emotional intelligence ranks a lot higher on my list than intellectual intelligence - do you have the right personality for the job? And while you can improve both in college, the former is not dependent on curriculum. I guess the point I'm making is that college degrees are overrated in a sense. Many companies like people to come in as a blank slate so they can train them exactly how they want them without the potential hire having any preconceived habits, preferences, etc.

I know that's a long rant. But it's my thoughtful response. Many of you will do everything you can to shoot holes in my post. I get the rivalry thing. But I hope to appeal to the more level headed posters here. Again, I recognize the wrong doings that occurred. And this post doesn't seek to excuse any of that. I'm also not meaning to delve into what punishments I feel would be appropriate. I'm simply discussing my opinion of the college experience and how it relates to the workings of the real world and how the media and many rival fans have sensationalized and overstated how our student athletes have been impacted.

I know it's probably not what you meant but your assertion that the UNC athletes chose to enroll in the fake classes proves the point that they were not innocent victims but were willing participants in the cheating and deserve to be punished for their actions. One of the main arguments from UNC fans is that this an academic problem that has little or nothing to do with athletics. If athletes knew the classes were phony but decided on their own to use them to help maintain eligibility they were knowingly breaking NCAA rules. That also disproves the argument that the fraud was an academic matter that did not involve athletics.

 

[Xception]

If all of it is on the player or student then why did UNC hold a power point presentation highlighting the laughable benefits of classes they would no longer be able to offer ?

 

[preacherfan]

First of all, thank you for the response. I truly appreciate your tone and I'm now confident you'd like to have some civil discourse regarding this.

To your first point,...I don't know what to say other than "I'm sorry."

Lastly, I'm not blaming anyone. I'm simply asking about personal accountability. Like I said, it's my belief that the student controls their fate. If you want to get a legit experience, you can get one. It may be harder for the students that are not equipped. But life ain't even. Some have advantages that others don't.

For the record, while I grew up in a severely disadvantaged home as far as education is concerned, I did graduate from college and then went to 3 different grad schools and graduated from all 3. I worked VERY hard the whole way. Nothing came easy to me.

I think the point where you and I are at an impasse is the issue of personal accountability. You and I take a somewhat different worldview. Our worldviews are shaped by our experiences and educations, among other things.

I admit to having little empathy for those who took out stupid mortgages during the housing boom and then cried until the government bailed them out. I know some who even took unfair advantage of that situation. Yeah, I am BLAMING the people who put themselves in a horrible situation. But, I put more blame on the systems in place to create the problems in the first place.

I said all that to say that you are BLAMING the student-athlete by using the personal accountability argument. And, to some degree, that might be legit. However, that argument really doesn't help the UNC case because UNC has a strong honor code that was violated by students taking classes that were clearly "irregular."

At the end of the day, you had a system in place to encourage, foster and promote academic fraud. Neither the administration nor the athletes come out looking good in the end. The coaches don't come out looking good either. There is no way in heck that they didn't know exactly what was going on.

 

[gjcollins79]

We should change the OP title to

"Should North Carolina discontinue their use of the phrase "academic institution"?

BINGO. A school has to try really hard to get put on probation from the accrediting agency of their jurisdiction.
They're a rogue entity masquerading as an "academic institution" in light of this whole to do.

 

[kybassfan]

That's just not true and it's the kind of sensationalism that's run amok regarding our situation. Those athletes had every opportunity to enroll in education, Pre law, drama or any other major of their choosing. They chose to go the route they did. Now, don't take that comment to mean that I support an institution offering phony majors and degrees. But pretty much every former athlete that I've heard speak to this issue has stated the same thing - a student athlete gets out what they put in. If you want to coast at any school, you can. If you want to pursue a more demanding educational experience, you can do that too. The onus is on the student. Y'all will argue that "18 year old kids can't be counted on to make those decisions and that's why athletic departments have counselors and the like". I say BS. First of all, at 18, one is an adult. You have to grow up sometime and taking responsibility for your future career path is a good way to start. Secondly, these student athletes should have someone in their life they count on to help them make decisions. If they don't, then those student athletes have to grow up a little faster. But y'all know the deal here. These ball players all think they're going on to play professionally. Only a few go to college for a "real" college experience. I know it's fun for y'all to make it sound like Carolina "took advantage of these poor, uninformed, minority teenagers" but where's the personal accountability?

I went to college. Most of y'all probably did too. Did you have someone making your decisions? Probably not. But for argument's sake, let's say that during your freshman year your academic advisor suggested you pursue a degree in Statistics. You hate statistics. Are you just going to say, "Oh well, I guess I'm doing statistics because that's what someone told me to do."? No. You took matters into your own hands. You told them what you were going to major in. You made that decision. You might have consulted with your parents, a mentor or an old high school teacher. Or you might have made that decision alone. I did. Granted, I didn't and most of you probably didn't play a sport on scholarship. But the decision is still the player's decision to make. But these players aren't looking for an education. Let's be real about that. Karl Anthony Towns seems like a very bright kid and a good student. But he wasn't looking for an education. He handled his business while he was there and for that he should be applauded. But don't act like he has a real interest in developing an in depth understanding of any one area that he plans to make a career of.

And I don't know about y'all, but I didn't learn my trade in college. I learned a lot in college. But it wasn't because of any curriculum. I learned cooperative learning. I learned time management. I learned interpersonal and social skills. But as far as my career (Human Services), I've learned everything I know from 20 years of experience in the field. I guess some careers rely on schooling - medical field, law and maybe a few others. But many jobs don't rely on schooling. They rely on experience to teach. One of my duties in my position is to hire people. What their GPA was in college is of no concern to me. Hell, their major doesn't really matter. What matters most to me when I'm hiring is the applicant's ability and willingness to learn. Also, emotional intelligence ranks a lot higher on my list than intellectual intelligence - do you have the right personality for the job? And while you can improve both in college, the former is not dependent on curriculum. I guess the point I'm making is that college degrees are overrated in a sense. Many companies like people to come in as a blank slate so they can train them exactly how they want them without the potential hire having any preconceived habits, preferences, etc.

I know that's a long rant. But it's my thoughtful response. Many of you will do everything you can to shoot holes in my post. I get the rivalry thing. But I hope to appeal to the more level headed posters here. Again, I recognize the wrong doings that occurred. And this post doesn't seek to excuse any of that. I'm also not meaning to delve into what punishments I feel would be appropriate. I'm simply discussing my opinion of the college experience and how it relates to the workings of the real world and how the media and many rival fans have sensationalized and overstated how our student athletes have been impacted.

I don't go along with most of what you say. I was a student athlete though it was quite some time ago, along the time rope was invented. I can tell you that the athletic department was VERY involved in the courses I picked, keeping up with my work, the grades I got, etc. They knew exactly what I was taking right after I registered, cause I got called on the carpet over it. They weren't used to freshmen loading up on the sciences and quite frankly, they were worried about the potential negative impact on the team GPA (I told them, I was more worried about my dad than their GPA and that satisfied them). Athletes I knew from other schools had a very similar experience. Their academics were monitored very closely. This should come as no surprise, no matter the major. An athlete spends too much time away from class and so much time is eaten up with practice, time in the training room, etc to let them drift. There is simply NO WAY the athletic depart, including the coaches, were not right on top of this situation. And, if they weren't, then the charges of LOIC are clearly not contestable.

Second, regarding your last 2 paragraphs, there is a massive contradiction there. If you are truly engaged in human services, you know what deep trust is put into the secondary education system regarding minimum standards, compliance of major and minor fields of study to accepted norms, etc. This is crucial in that it forms the underpinning of a base of knowledge the candidate brings to a particular position, particularly for new hires. UNC stands accused of academic fraud in this regard and the accusatory body has assigned them probation. Athletics aside, this is a horrible situation that UNC fostered over the years. How many students? 10,000? 1? All the same. But in your last paragraph, you dismiss the value of the degree and the level of accomplishment. The message you convey is that, so what, those things are not so important. And you boldly state: "the media and many rival fans have sensationalized and overstated how our student athletes have been impacted." You are wrong. One can not so easily dismiss the negative impact of academic fraud while claiming even a shred of academic integrity.

I will say this. UNC seems to be in lockstep with you on this. SACS has condemned them for what they have done. They stand accused by the NCAA. We see no hint of remorse on the part of UNC, her fans or her athletic departments. Based on this, I believe that what you see as sensational treatment is, in fact, fairly objective discussion. Its only sensational to the biased eye, fearful of what may come in the way of punishment. I have stated that UNC has a high road in this, if only they would take it. Admit wrong doing. Self impose punishment. Separate themselves from those involved. Open themselves to third party review.

I don't see the first step. Do you?

 

[martinsm30]

I see a University that pushed the narrative that this was a football issue and now I see a University that is pushing this as an issue to keep the members of the women's basketball team eligible. When does this attempt to save men's basketball stop?

1. Only a football issue
2. Everybody does it
3. Rogue admin and professor
4. The students are responsible
5. The media's fault (Sensationalism)
6. Whistleblowers sensationalized this to line their own pockets
7. Primarily a Women's Basketball issue

The broad UNC talking points are listed above that I can think of off the top of my head. Anyone have any other narratives that they have thrown at us? Funny when you list them out it is easy to see that each one of them is an attempt to clutter the real issue. You can also see that if the larger media outlets were engaged in this at all some of those talking points would land UNC*** in even more hot water.

 

[Xception]

UNC has blamed this on everyone but themselves , it was rogues and now it's the players fault . Everybody conspired for decades and UNC knew nothing , they didn't even discover the problem . N.C. State fans broke it open while not even being on campus , along with Dan Kane they kept making discoveries from afar while UNC was dumbfounded by each new revelation . Bottom line is that UNC was willfully stupid out of necessity , UNC orchestrated the whole thing and it served them best to remain stupid .

 

[Smashcat]

UNC orchestrated the whole thing and it served them best to remain stupid

Absolutely.

 

[gunslingerdick]

LOL. You guys act like I'm a hired PR gun for the school. These are my thoughts. Why are you attributing them to school officials?

I don't go along with most of what you say. I was a student athlete though it was quite some time ago, along the time rope was invented. I can tell you that the athletic department was VERY involved in the courses I picked, keeping up with my work, the grades I got, etc. They knew exactly what I was taking right after I registered, cause I got called on the carpet over it. They weren't used to freshmen loading up on the sciences and quite frankly, they were worried about the potential negative impact on the team GPA (I told them, I was more worried about my dad than their GPA and that satisfied them). Athletes I knew from other schools had a very similar experience. Their academics were monitored very closely. This should come as no surprise, no matter the major. An athlete spends too much time away from class and so much time is eaten up with practice, time in the training room, etc to let them drift. There is simply NO WAY the athletic depart, including the coaches, were not right on top of this situation. And, if they weren't, then the charges of LOIC are clearly not contestable.

Second, regarding your last 2 paragraphs, there is a massive contradiction there. If you are truly engaged in human services, you know what deep trust is put into the secondary education system regarding minimum standards, compliance of major and minor fields of study to accepted norms, etc. This is crucial in that it forms the underpinning of a base of knowledge the candidate brings to a particular position, particularly for new hires. UNC stands accused of academic fraud in this regard and the accusatory body has assigned them probation. Athletics aside, this is a horrible situation that UNC fostered over the years. How many students? 10,000? 1? All the same. But in your last paragraph, you dismiss the value of the degree and the level of accomplishment. The message you convey is that, so what, those things are not so important. And you boldly state: "the media and many rival fans have sensationalized and overstated how our student athletes have been impacted." You are wrong. One can not so easily dismiss the negative impact of academic fraud while claiming even a shred of academic integrity.

I will say this. UNC seems to be in lockstep with you on this. SACS has condemned them for what they have done. They stand accused by the NCAA. We see no hint of remorse on the part of UNC, her fans or her athletic departments. Based on this, I believe that what you see as sensational treatment is, in fact, fairly objective discussion. Its only sensational to the biased eye, fearful of what may come in the way of punishment. I have stated that UNC has a high road in this, if only they would take it. Admit wrong doing. Self impose punishment. Separate themselves from those involved. Open themselves to third party review.

I don't see the first step. Do you?

Good post. I just disagree with much of it. I'm the Executive Director of a nonprofit organization. I have very little knowledge of the standards of secondary education systems. I don't care all that much to know about it as it has next to nothing to do with the services my agency provides. We work with disadvantaged youth and families - most of whom didn't go to college (parents/guardians) or won't go to college (youth). There is no specific curriculum that prepares my staff on how to deal with the families and their issues. The only way one knows how to do that is to learn our service delivery model, implement it and be a caring, dedicated and hard working individual. I have my own standards I have to meet. I'm certainly not studying up on anyone else's. When I have open positions, I look for emotionally intelligent, socially aware, compassionate people that have an aptitude for learning and a desire to make a difference in our community. What they studied is of little consequence. Sure, those that have a psychology degree or a human development degree or a sociology degree might get a look first. But I've hired people with all types of backgrounds. And what's far more important to me than what one's major was is their work history. You can't substitute for experience. But I'm not always blessed with applicants that have gobs of experience. When I'm forced to go with a greenhorn, again, their personality and willingness mean a lot more to me.

My sister was a poli sci major at VT, she's a special ed teacher. My good friend was a drama major at VT. He now works in IT management for UPenn. Another close friend was a agriculture major at VT. He now works for Morgan Stanley. I'm just saying that majors aren't that important for most professions. Most professions have training specific for your actual job. And they rely on employees to learn through practice, not in theory. That's my opinion and you certainly don't have to agree with it. Cool.

As far as all that other stuff about UNC and what you think they did or how you think they should be punished, I already stated I wasn't going in that direction in this thread. But I've surfaced in a few others here. So I'm sure you'll have another opportunity to take me to task again.

 

[kybassfan]

LOL. You guys act like I'm a hired PR gun for the school. These are my thoughts. Why are you attributing them to school officials?




Good post. I just disagree with much of it. I'm the Executive Director of a nonprofit organization. I have very little knowledge of the standards of secondary education systems. I don't care all that much to know about it as it has next to nothing to do with the services my agency provides. We work with disadvantaged youth and families - most of whom didn't go to college (parents/guardians) or won't go to college (youth). There is no specific curriculum that prepares my staff on how to deal with the families and their issues. The only way one knows how to do that is to learn our service delivery model, implement it and be a caring, dedicated and hard working individual. I have my own standards I have to meet. I'm certainly not studying up on anyone else's. When I have open positions, I look for emotionally intelligent, socially aware, compassionate people that have an aptitude for learning and a desire to make a difference in our community. What they studied is of little consequence. Sure, those that have a psychology degree or a human development degree or a sociology degree might get a look first. But I've hired people with all types of backgrounds. And what's far more important to me than what one's major was is their work history. You can't substitute for experience. But I'm not always blessed with applicants that have gobs of experience. When I'm forced to go with a greenhorn, again, their personality and willingness mean a lot more to me.

My sister was a poli sci major at VT, she's a special ed teacher. My good friend was a drama major at VT. He now works in IT management for UPenn. Another close friend was a agriculture major at VT. He now works for Morgan Stanley. I'm just saying that majors aren't that important for most professions. Most professions have training specific for your actual job. And they rely on employees to learn through practice, not in theory. That's my opinion and you certainly don't have to agree with it. Cool.

As far as all that other stuff about UNC and what you think they did or how you think they should be punished, I already stated I wasn't going in that direction in this thread. But I've surfaced in a few others here. So I'm sure you'll have another opportunity to take me to task again.

No we merely point out that you mimic the seeming lack of regard for academic integrity and ethics seemingly on display by UNC and their PR efforts. In your case, you profess to place no value in it.

Let me put it in terms that should hit a bit closer to home. Most non-profit organizations depend on donations. Those donations are made based on the reputation of the organization to put the resource to an expected and good use. Let's say a certain executive director was using 75% of the funds to defray administrative overhead consisting of apartment rent and subsidies for a female assistant as compensation for her "skills" in stress relief for said director. This goes on for a decade and is uncovered by an auditing firm. The story is released, made public, is headline news on both MSNBC and Fox News and is the subject of every editorial segment for two weeks straight.

What likely happens to those donations? Normally such an organization would fall on their sword, fire everyone associated with resource consumption, hire a watch dog and publish the books for all to see.

What we see is the director making an apology, with his wife on one arm, mistress on the other, claiming to be patching things up with his wife and meeting his other obligations.

Please send money.

Now I'm sure you'd never do anything like that, or I want that to be true. However, hopefully you'll see the analogy when the integrity of the very product or service you provide is called into question, whether academic excellence or valued community service.

Its not the major that's in question. Its the integrity (or lack thereof) and oversight that assures it. Simply put, we see no contrition regarding the terrible lack of stewardship on the part of the stewards or the fans.

 

[gunslingerdick]

No we merely point out that you mimic the seeming lack of regard for academic integrity and ethics seemingly on display by UNC and their PR efforts. In your case, you profess to place no value in it.

Let me put it in terms that should hit a bit closer to home. Most non-profit organizations depend on donations. Those donations are made based on the reputation of the organization to put the resource to an expected and good use. Let's say a certain executive director was using 75% of the funds to defray administrative overhead consisting of apartment rent and subsidies for a female assistant as compensation for her "skills" in stress relief for said director. This goes on for a decade and is uncovered by an auditing firm. The story is released, made public, is headline news on both MSNBC and Fox News and is the subject of every editorial segment for two weeks straight.

What likely happens to those donations? Normally such an organization would fall on their sword, fire everyone associated with resource consumption, hire a watch dog and publish the books for all to see.

What we see is the director making an apology, with his wife on one arm, mistress on the other, claiming to be patching things up with his wife and meeting his other obligations.

Please send money.

Now I'm sure you'd never do anything like that, or I want that to be true. However, hopefully you'll see the analogy when the integrity of the very product or service you provide is called into question, whether academic excellence or valued community service.

Its not the major that's in question. Its the integrity (or lack thereof) and oversight that assures it. Simply put, we see no contrition regarding the terrible lack of stewardship on the part of the stewards or the fans.

I can appreciate the effort you made in your attempted analogy. But the two situations are not analogous. Let me try:

An entry level employee at said nonprofit organization is caught writing case notes stating that certain services were delivered on certain dates. However the employee did not actually see the clients on those dates and deliver the services in the manner in which the case notes suggest. The supervisor finds out. The employee is fired. Analogy over.

I like mine better.

 

[Old_Red]

LOL. You guys act like I'm a hired PR gun for the school. These are my thoughts. Why are you attributing them to school officials?




Good post. I just disagree with much of it. I'm the Executive Director of a nonprofit organization. I have very little knowledge of the standards of secondary education systems. I don't care all that much to know about it as it has next to nothing to do with ....

UNC*** fans seem to be lax on understanding all kinds of standards and rules. Well, the entire UNC*** athletic department is of the same mind. You can't blame the students when UNC**** benefited so much by keeping athletes eligible with fraudulent classes when they were supposed to be providing them with a University level education. Not everyone will be a rocket scientist, but they deserve much more than a diploma that represents that they signed up for no-show classes that gave passing grades for plagiarized papers.

You are allowed to post here. Aren't you one of the MOD's on UNC****'s board where all others are banned regardless of the content of their posts if they dare mention this scandal? Aren't you one of the ones who edit posts of the banned where you make them objects of ridicule? Why should we not treat you as our fans have been treated there?

 

[kybassfan]

I can appreciate the effort you made in your attempted analogy. But the two situations are not analogous. Let me try:

An entry level employee at said nonprofit organization is caught writing case notes stating that certain services were delivered on certain dates. However the employee did not actually see the clients on those dates and deliver the services in the manner in which the case notes suggest. The supervisor finds out. The employee is fired. Analogy over.

I like mine better.

Regrettably, I'm not surprised you like yours better. However, we'll work with yours.

You made no offer to make good on the fraudulent services. Roy still has his job, as does the AD as does the President of the University.

I rest my case.

 

[preacherfan]

What Gunslinger doesn't address and in fact I have not seen addressed by anyone who defends UNC is WHY didn't UNC just create easy classes for athletes?

JPScott has often proposed the idea that colleges could offer specific classes that would help these kids who have dreams of playing pro basketball and help those who are severely learning disadvantaged as well.

Not only was the "paper class" plan fraudulent but it didn't offer a student a real learning opportunity. Deb Crowder may have had good intentions in that regard but she was obviously incompetent to design a class assignment that promoted any real learning.

BTW, when I read on other boards that a "paper class" was an "easy class," I realize how absolutely clueless some posters are about higher education.

My answer to my own question above is this: UNC needed to keep up the illusion that their athletes were getting a good education and that they were succeeding in the classroom at the same time the athletes were 100% devoted to their sport. So, instead of giving them easy classes, UNC chose the fraudulent route. This way, they could (as Bradley Bethel told Folt) admit athletes who could never succeed in college.

 

[Lumpy 2]

I can appreciate the effort you made in your attempted analogy. But the two situations are not analogous. Let me try:

An entry level employee at said nonprofit organization is caught writing case notes stating that certain services were delivered on certain dates. However the employee did not actually see the clients on those dates and deliver the services in the manner in which the case notes suggest. The supervisor finds out. The employee is fired. Analogy over.

I like mine better.

In your analogy Roy is that employee who has been making the claims that things were being done in a proper manner but the whole organization is dirty and Roy is just continuing to do things the way they have been done for years. When the scheme becomes public knowledge, instead of firing Roy they give him a contract extension and a raise because Roy knows how the scheme works and knows everyone who is involved.

 

[gunslingerdick]

You are allowed to post here. Aren't you one of the MOD's on UNC****'s board where all others are banned regardless of the content of their posts if they dare mention this scandal? Aren't you one of the ones who edit posts of the banned where you make them objects of ridicule? Why should we not treat you as our fans have been treated there?

No, I am not a moderator. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.

 

[Federal Cat]

I only have one thing to say about UNCheats And that's all I have to say

 

[JPScott]

JPScott has often proposed the idea that colleges could offer specific classes that would help these kids who have dreams of playing pro basketball and help those who are severely learning disadvantaged as well.

Well just for the record what I've mentioned is that I think that a legitimate curriculum could be developed around people with an interest in professional sports, whether it's as an athlete or working in other aspects such as in the front office, a coach or as a sports agent etc.

Beyond the core college curriculum you could have things like sports marketing, financial management, analytics, media relations, even classes in basketball theory, basketball history, etc.

Of course Jim Harrick and his son kind of ruined the whole idea and made it a laughing stock. But I think it could be a legitimate curriculum if done right.

FWIW, I know that at one time former UNC coach (in the 1940's) Ben Carnevale used to hold a seminar on the history of UNC basketball. If UK had a similar course, I think that would be interesting to take for students at UK (whether they were an athlete or not). (BTW, I've in the past worked on putting together a hypothetical syllabus for a lecture series on UK basketball history, just to see what it would look like. )

Or how about if John Calipari gave a weekly lecture on basketball theory? I'd have to think that would generate a lot of interest among the student body.

 

[DodgerDukie1985]

Should they? Yes. But I have to admit I enjoy how blind UNC fans are to the truth as to what the "Carolina Way" truly stands for in the eyes of anyone outside of Chapel Hill. In that sense, I hope they keep using it so I can continue to guffaw at their unbelievable ignorance.

 

[BBUK]

So, "Tickle Me Elmo" seems gone. (I haven't seen it post, but I haven't been looking hard either.) Can it be said; ding dong the witch is, _ _ _ _?

 

[martinsm30]

What Gunslinger doesn't address and in fact I have not seen addressed by anyone who defends UNC is WHY didn't UNC just create easy classes for athletes?

JPScott has often proposed the idea that colleges could offer specific classes that would help these kids who have dreams of playing pro basketball and help those who are severely learning disadvantaged as well.

Not only was the "paper class" plan fraudulent but it didn't offer a student a real learning opportunity. Deb Crowder may have had good intentions in that regard but she was obviously incompetent to design a class assignment that promoted any real learning.

BTW, when I read on other boards that a "paper class" was an "easy class," I realize how absolutely clueless some posters are about higher education.

My answer to my own question above is this: UNC needed to keep up the illusion that their athletes were getting a good education and that they were succeeding in the classroom at the same time the athletes were 100% devoted to their sport. So, instead of giving them easy classes, UNC chose the fraudulent route. This way, they could (as Bradley Bethel told Folt) admit athletes who could never succeed in college.

Other added benefits: UNC*** got to stroll to the stage and receive awards for their athlete's academic accomplishments. Their fans got to shout from the roof tops how UNC*** was doing things the right way, The Carolina Way. Their coaches got their bonus money for academic excellence. Their coaches did not have to worry about players being academically ineligible. We got to hear Vitale scream at us about how these UNC*** guys were such great athletes while being great students on every UNC*** game he did.

 

[BigRedMachineBigBlueNation]

No because the more they use it now, the more it loses it's meaning.

 

[martinsm30]

LOL. You guys act like I'm a hired PR gun for the school. These are my thoughts. Why are you attributing them to school officials?




Good post. I just disagree with much of it. I'm the Executive Director of a nonprofit organization. I have very little knowledge of the standards of secondary education systems. I don't care all that much to know about it as it has next to nothing to do with the services my agency provides. We work with disadvantaged youth and families - most of whom didn't go to college (parents/guardians) or won't go to college (youth). There is no specific curriculum that prepares my staff on how to deal with the families and their issues. The only way one knows how to do that is to learn our service delivery model, implement it and be a caring, dedicated and hard working individual. I have my own standards I have to meet. I'm certainly not studying up on anyone else's. When I have open positions, I look for emotionally intelligent, socially aware, compassionate people that have an aptitude for learning and a desire to make a difference in our community. What they studied is of little consequence. Sure, those that have a psychology degree or a human development degree or a sociology degree might get a look first. But I've hired people with all types of backgrounds. And what's far more important to me than what one's major was is their work history. You can't substitute for experience. But I'm not always blessed with applicants that have gobs of experience. When I'm forced to go with a greenhorn, again, their personality and willingness mean a lot more to me.

My sister was a poli sci major at VT, she's a special ed teacher. My good friend was a drama major at VT. He now works in IT management for UPenn. Another close friend was a agriculture major at VT. He now works for Morgan Stanley. I'm just saying that majors aren't that important for most professions. Most professions have training specific for your actual job. And they rely on employees to learn through practice, not in theory. That's my opinion and you certainly don't have to agree with it. Cool.

As far as all that other stuff about UNC and what you think they did or how you think they should be punished, I already stated I wasn't going in that direction in this thread. But I've surfaced in a few others here. So I'm sure you'll have another opportunity to take me to task again.

You're a fan so you mimic what the PR machine over there is putting out. You are a UNC*** fanatic (fan) so you attempt to use your personal thoughts and experiences to justify UNC***s failure to run their university ethically. I am a UK fan and there were times during our scandals that I wanted to do what you are doing but our University's administration stepped up and admitted guilt and at that point I just accepted it. We as a fan base mostly accepted it. I also grew up to understand if I cheated to get what I wanted it was greatly diminished but that is just my personal standards. Your University's administration has done everything in its power to hide from this scandal so the UNC*** fan base has fallen in line with the UNC*** leadership.

Last UK scandal was thirty years ago and we learned some hard lessons. Maybe it is time for UNC*** to learn some hard lessons.