OT: Villanova Men Win it With a 3 at the Buzzer

[Charliebball]

Appreciate the other side of the story but, with all due respect, IMO that's all a bunch of cr*p. The amount of money UNC's highest level administrators have spent on lawyers and PR firms, trying to spin this thing, with a pattern of always denying until they can no longer deny, then firing a scapegoat... It's just a load of crap. I read Willingham's book. Even if she has an axe to grind and is out to get somebody, it still can't be denied that the athletic dept. counsellors colluded with the "academics" to place student athletes in non-existent courses, get them specific grades on critical papers, and otherwise manipulate athletic eligibility in ways that are beyond anything that cold be considered 'normal' or 'acceptable.' It is the very complicity of the academic departments than makes this so egregious.

That said I have an open mind and would like to see the documentary.

Fair enough.........by the way why are we dealing with this crap while UConn is kicking butt!!!!!

 

[Charliebball]

I spent 40 years in higher education. I made errors from time to time, but none that required me to produce a documentary to defend my conduct, my career, or my integrity.

I have also served as a faculty committee member for institutional accreditation. Even if the NCAA gives UNC a pass (how could they?), the accrediting body should come down on the university like a hammer from hell. These weren't minor violations of fine print rules. They were, it strongly appears, violations of the core principles that constitute a university's reason to exist.

UNC won't be stripped of its accreditation. But there are meaningful sanctions available of sufficient severity to ensure that in the future, UNC's curriculum is at least real.

FYI:

Accrediting group to UNC: Show us reforms are working to prevent academic fraud

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. — The organization that accredits the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has given the school a year to prove that its efforts to prevent academic fraud work.

The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools last month placed UNC-Chapel Hill on probation for 12 months for violating seven principles of accreditation:
integrity, program content, control of intercollegiate athletics, academic support services, academic freedom, faculty role in governance and Title IV program responsibilities.

The move was based on a review of the findings of independent investigator Kenneth Wainstein, who released a report in October that showed academic advisers at UNC-Chapel Hill steered student-athletes for 18 years toward classes that never met and required only a short paper to pass.

Even before the Wainstein report was issued, the university had started working on changes to its policies and procedures so academic fraud wouldn't recur.

In a July 1 letter to Chancellor Carol Folt, SACS officials said that, while they appreciate the effort, UNC-CHapel Hill has provided no evidence that the changes have had any effect.

University officials must, before next April, submit a report to SACS detailing how they are meeting the seven principles the school had violated and the role of the various changes in meeting those goals. A SACS committee will then visit Chapel Hill for an on-site review.

If the school is still found deficient in any areas, SACS could extend the probation for up to another 12 months. UNC-Chapel Hill risks losing its accreditation after that, as federal law prohibits a university from being on probation for more than two years for failure to meet accreditation standards.

Accreditation affects how much in loans and financial aid the federal government will provide to a school.


Read more at Accrediting group to UNC: Show us reforms are working to prevent academic fraud :: WRAL.com

 

[Icebear]

The accrediting group is doing something including follow up meanwhile still nothing more than crickets from the NCAA.

 

[UcMiami]

Charlieball - appreciate your passion and willingness to argue the opposite side of generally accepted (and acknowledge by UNC) academic fraud. Are all the facts being presented in an unbiased manner on either side - absolutely not, but as we see across the universe of human existence, the institutions/corporations/powerful/wealthy have incredible resources to coverup, obfuscate, play the long game, go one the offense, etc. and the money and resources to create ramparts around themselves that are very hard to crack.
It seems pretty clear from UNCs own report that while the general student body gained access to the fraudulent courses, they were put in place and promoted for the athletic department and the extent of the fraud grew to the point that it was out of anyone's control. The fact that the proportion of fraudulent student/classes taken by student athletes compared to the UNC student body as a whole was so heavily weighted to student athletes also suggests both that they remained in existence for the benefit of the athletic department and that whatever the experience of individual tutors or academic advisers was, there was an effort to promote these course within athletic department academic support staff (that the support staff was 'moved out' of the Athletic Department was just another level of obfuscation without changing the power structure or the people who evaluate their work by the results they achieved.
That one of that staff presented a power point to coaches detailing the issues that the end to the fraudulent classes would cause and possible work arounds shows how much the fraud was imbedded in the athletic departments ability to field competitive teams.
And none of the above is based on newspapers or whistleblowers but by the finally serious investigation that UNC bought and paid for and published themselves.

 

[Charliebball]

Charlieball - appreciate your passion and willingness to argue the opposite side of generally accepted (and acknowledge by UNC) academic fraud. Are all the facts being presented in an unbiased manner on either side - absolutely not, but as we see across the universe of human existence, the institutions/corporations/powerful/wealthy have incredible resources to coverup, obfuscate, play the long game, go one the offense, etc. and the money and resources to create ramparts around themselves that are very hard to crack.
It seems pretty clear from UNCs own report that while the general student body gained access to the fraudulent courses, they were put in place and promoted for the athletic department and the extent of the fraud grew to the point that it was out of anyone's control. The fact that the proportion of fraudulent student/classes taken by student athletes compared to the UNC student body as a whole was so heavily weighted to student athletes also suggests both that they remained in existence for the benefit of the athletic department and that whatever the experience of individual tutors or academic advisers was, there was an effort to promote these course within athletic department academic support staff (that the support staff was 'moved out' of the Athletic Department was just another level of obfuscation without changing the power structure or the people who evaluate their work by the results they achieved.
That one of that staff presented a power point to coaches detailing the issues that the end to the fraudulent classes would cause and possible work arounds shows how much the fraud was imbedded in the athletic departments ability to field competitive teams.
And none of the above is based on newspapers or whistleblowers but by the finally serious investigation that UNC bought and paid for and published themselves.

I am not trying to defend the indefensible.........clearly UNC has much to answer for..........however if you followed the story from the inside you would see that some of the facts discovered by the school's own investigations have been tainted by members of the academic community who have a bone to pick with the school unrelated to these activities......people like Professor Jay Smith and later Mary Willingham have been aggressively attacking the school's athletic programs based on issues relating to political infighting well before fraud ever became an issue.......they have used this situation to further their own personal quests which have in turn cost some innocent faculty members both their livelihood and their and reputation...........no need to continue this thread on my part.........let the chips fall where they may