Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="CL82, post: 2373333, member: 44"] You are conflating the terms allowed/honored with planned/adopted. When you go to store and an object is mis-priced such that it is below their cost, the store may (and actually must under some consumer protection law) honor the price. That's different from having a plan whereby all products will sold at less than cost. Likewise, UNC "honoring" the grading of it's fraudulent courses, doesn't mean that they had a plan have all courses to be nonsubstantive. The NCAA won't question the university's academic plan, but UNC has never said that it planned to commit academic fraud. If it did, it would lose accreditation. So UNC is walking a tightrope to the NCAA it's saying yeah, these are our courses and you can't do anything about it, but to the accrediting body it is saying, whoops, this was a mistake we've corrected it. They shouldn't be allowed to play it both ways and the NCAA forcing them to acknowledge whether these were part of the university's academic plan (which would make them unassailable from the NCAA's rules but cause accreditation issues) or whether they were an aberration (which didn't cause loss of accreditation, but would mean that weren't part of the university's policy and thus not protected for NCAA purposes.) Understand? [/QUOTE]