Two points raised in different posts in the last hockey-l digest
activated my anti-NC$$, anti-paternalism alert system.
First is the discussion of yet-another-eligibility hassle for
Maine. The NC$$ in determining student athlete eligibility
apparently considers a Pass a D. This is *not* what most schools
do when calculating a GPA or when evaluating a transfer applicant.
A Pass is a Pass. It might have been a D; it might have been an A.
The fact is it wasn't any specific grade. There are a *lot* of
excellent educational reasons for having at least some options
for a Pass/Fail grade. One is encouraging a student to broaden out
into totally unfamiliar ground without risking zapping that GPA.
Another is allowing adjustment to an academic setting with the
emphasis on learning, but worrying about grades. For anyone who
thinks this is a wimpy copout, MIT used to, and may still, offer
a Pass/Fail option to freshman.
So my point is that we should treat student athletes *just* like
any other student, neither granting special privileges nor
invoking harsher rules.
The second similar point that was raised in another post
was a coach asking a teacher to call him if any of his
students missed a class. Few professors in my lengthy (and
ongoing) college experience still checked for attendance
(and they were all "old-school" about to retire.) A student
in college is supposed to be learning to set his/her own
priorities, to understand what is necessary, and to develop
good judgement. If you cut an occasional class, the world
doesn't end. Just don't over do it and hurt your grades.
Shouldn't a student athlete have the same freedom to grow
up and become an adult without a call to a surrogate father?
Again, why not treat them *exactly* like other students?
*   Dave Carroll BU '73 cum laude
*   (who *sure* didn't attend every class at BU
*    unless the Dugout counts as an auxiliary classroom)
*   [log in to unmask]     (or if path problems ...
*   [log in to unmask]