HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Mike Machnik <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
College Hockey discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 16 Jan 91 14:47:08 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (40 lines)
Mark Grassl writes:
>Lt. Matt Jonson writes:
>>Why does a division I athlete deserve any more academic assistance than
>>any other given student...?
>
>Maybe because the athletic department wants to keep them eligible.
>Maybe the athletes miss class due to games.  Maybe the athletes can't go
>to office hours due to practice.  I don't like to begrudge anyone the
>chance to learn something extra through the use of tutors or academic
>assistance.  The point is they are pushed to learn something.
>But you may have a point, is academic assistance available to non-athletes?
>From experience I would say many students just don't ask often enough for
>help(shyness? embarassment?).
 
    Yes, I don't think the problem is that athletes are being given "more"
    academic assistance than other students.  It is true that average
    students don't take enough advantage of the avenues open to them for
    help - but they are there.  In the case of athletes, it seems that the
    NCAA is trying to get a better handle on how its athletes are doing
    in school so it can cut down on the situations where basketball
    teams graduate only 35% or so of their players, and also to cut down
    on the number of players who go on probation because of poor grades.
 
    Some schools already have academic advisors for their athletes (RPI
    among others) and many coaches already keep firm tabs on how their
    athletes are doing in school.  This regulation just seems to be
    acknowledging that this is a positive thing and that it is worth
    investing time and money in.  I believe that the cost is negligible
    since most tutors come from work-study and are paid through financial
    aid - they don't make much.  And, if you figure that the number of paid
    assistant coaches has been decreased and take some of that money to
    put towards the tutors/advisors, then it seems to me that you're
    actually getting more value for your money than you were before.
 
    Of course, I think the cutting of the assistants was bad, but it
    doesn't make a difference now.
 
 
    - mike

ATOM RSS1 RSS2