National Collegiate Athletic Association |
CommentApril 14, 1997
The Faculty Voice -- An NCAA version of 'The Scarlet Letter'
BY NORMAN CHERVANY AND MARIAH SNYDER Hester Prynne was the villain or the heroine, depending on your perspective, in Nathaniel Hawthorne's novel "The Scarlet Letter." In the story, the townspeople of colonial New England considered her "transgression" -- not her personal circumstances -- and made their judgment at a general level. The real tragedy in the story was not so much the townspeople's initial judgment as it was their failure to realize that judgments about individuals require consideration of specific facts, not stereotyping. In an idyllic world, all student-athletes seeking admission to our colleges and universities would have core-course and overall grade-point averages of 3.500 or more and ACT or SAT scores at the 90-plus percentile. We do, however, live in a real world in which student-athletes with varying academic records based upon varying personal circumstances seek admission to and matriculate at our institutions. Two specific subsets of the student-athletes -- the partial qualifier and the learning-disabled -- currently face reactions similar to those Hester faced: "Once labeled, always guilty!" Rather than a scarlet "A" stitched on their uniforms, these student-athletes are most often treated as if they have "PQ" (partial qualifier) or "LD" (learning-disabled) tattooed on their foreheads. "Once there, it should not be removed!" As representative of our colleges and universities, we tend to assume -- or perhaps hope is more accurate -- that the student-athletes seeking admission have worked diligently during the course of their high-school studies to prepare for college. Further, we assume that this diligent work was done in a supportive educational and personal environment. But all too often, reality is at odds with our assumptions, at odds with our hopes. For some student-athletes, it was only during their junior and senior years in high school that the desire to go to college crystallized; their academic profiles reflect this. For others, the main focus of their high-school teachers had to be just keeping order rather than actual teaching; student-athletes in this environment did not receive an adequate preparation for college. Other student-athletes struggled with their studies before the lucky ones had a teacher or counselor who suspected that they might have a learning disability and were provided with assistance. Over the last decade, the NCAA has acted strongly and appropriately to dispel concerns that student-athletes with low academic profiles are being exploited by the athletics enterprise within colleges and universities. Legislation has been passed that sets minimum academic admission and progress standards. This legislation, these standards, were sorely needed. It has done a great deal to improve the "student" side of the student-athlete. It has done a great deal to make sure that student-athletes, as well as the athletics enterprise, gains from their years of competition. As the NCAA debates refinements to this legislation, however, we often seem to focus more on the costs and benefits to the intercollegiate athletics enterprise in total and forget about the costs and benefits of each student-athlete as an individual. In the name of "sending a message" to the high schools and their communities about the need for good academic preparation and in the name of preventing "other schools" from gaining a competitive advantage, we often forget about the specific facts that describe a specific student-athlete. We often forget about individual student-athlete welfare. How does this type of thinking play itself out to the detriment of the welfare of some individual student-athletes? Consider for a moment the debate at the 1997 NCAA Convention in Nashville, Tennessee, surrounding the earning back of a fourth year of eligibility for a partial qualifier. The proposal was modest: "A partial qualifier who earned her or his degree in four years could regain a fourth year of eligibility." The debate was lively and, from our perspective, successful; the amendment was passed by a narrow margin. The NCAA delegates opposing the proposal focused on the "bad message about the need for academic preparation" that the change would send to the high schools and prospective student-athletes. The supporters of the amendment focused upon rewarding the student-athlete who, in spite of a poor record in high school, has demonstrated by her or his in-college performance that the skills needed to succeed as a student have been developed. What surprised us was not the seriousness and intensity of the debate. The NCAA must continue to be vigilant with respect to issues of academic standards and student-athlete exploitation. What did surprise us was the resistance of many delegates at the Convention to accept the principle that current academic performance is more important than past academic performance; to accept the principle that, based upon solid current evidence, we need to treat each student-athlete as an individual rather than as an anonymous member of a larger group. The developing discussion surrounding the academic-performance standards for learning-disabled student-athletes has a strong similarity to the discussion surrounding the partial qualifier. The essence of the issue with learning-disabled student-athletes focuses on two related areas: (1) What constitutes a full-time semester or quarter academic workload and (2) what constitutes adequate academic progress toward a degree? The question that the NCAA and individual conferences face is: Under what conditions should exceptions to the standard rules be made for individual student-athletes with diagnosed learning disabilities? And, what should the nature of these exceptions be? Our concern is that the same arguments used by the opponents to the partial-qualifier amendment in Nashville will be used to limit or deny full-time load and satisfactory-progress exception to qualified learning-disabled student-athletes. We can already hear the refrain noted a few paragraphs back: "In the name of sending a message to the high schools and their communities about the need for good academic preparation, in the name of preventing other schools from gaining a competitive advantage, we forget about the specific facts that describe a specific student-athlete." We recognize that learning disabilities are not homogenous across individuals. We all recognize not all learning disabilities require the same accommodation. Further, we recognize that some student-athletes with certain learning disabilities may need no special accommodations with respect to full-time loads and normal progress. But, we also recognize -- based upon the specific cases with which we have dealt and based upon general discussion in which we have participated -- that there is a tendency to question the legitimacy of these cases. We all must be vigilant to maintain the progress we have made in academic standards, but.... The NCAA and intercollegiate athletics suffer when we forget about individual student-athlete welfare because we are trying to do something for the intercollegiate athletics enterprise in total. We must not forget this! Norman Chervany and Mariah Snyder serve as faculty athletics representatives at the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities. Comment -- A losing season sharpens survival skills
BY TINA SLINKER Anyone who has either coached or taught kids needs to read the following article. I had a friend once tell me that if you coach long enough, you eventually will experience a season like my team did this year -- a season with a distraught 5-21 record, a year full of injuries, adversities and disappointments. We learned to survive. A season like this is a true test of character for everyone involved. Your self-esteem is constantly challenged, your goals are almost too unattainable to pursue, and your entire state of being becomes a day-to-day battle of seeking ways to overcome the adversities you face in a losing environment. Those you coach become increasingly dependent on your direction and leadership. Their self-confidence hinges on your ability to believe in the very thing you teach. Your mere existence must be one that gives insight to a simplistic way of survival. What a great pressure this becomes for you and your staff. Your own belief system struggles as you continuously search for solutions. Yet no answers seem to evolve and more adversities develop, frustration becomes increasingly apparent, and your soul simply feels lost. This force, seemingly destructive and unbearable, becomes a constant opponent that daily challenges your team and its value in a relentless, competitive world. To watch these young people, whom you love so much, struggle as they strive to maintain their own self-worth is devastating. I found myself searching, seeking ways to motivate my players and to keep a balance between what I perceive as successful and what my peers project as successful. I had to "let go" of those worldly judgments and find peace in knowing that life is more than just winning a game. Prayer became my resource for hope. Luckily, my coaching staff embraced me as they provided my stability and became my constant companions. They each unselfishly offered support that went far beyond the boundaries of their job. Their friendship became my true source of survival. I turned to my kids and remembered I started coaching because of the kinship young people offer. I was enlightened by their efforts to continue to strive to be the best they could be. I felt great pride as they reached out to each other and became more of a team than any group I had ever coached. I rested knowing that the passion I have is not only for the game but for the development of the individual. I treasured the experience of watching them grow more as people. I know now that no one can diminish the aspects of coaching that go far beyond the winning of a game. Those blessings exist because of the process -- the caring, the teaching and the striving to make a difference in some young person's life. What better quality can we teach than hope? What lesson better taught than finding a way to survive? That no matter what obstacles these young people face, they know they have the ability to continue to believe in who they are. You know what? We survived! As coaches, are we at our best when we are teachers, reflecting a knowledge that we can make it through any adverse situation if we continue to believe and have faith. That being a winner is much more than winning a game, that it is important to develop a positive and productive attitude both on and off the court no matter how tough or unfair life's challenges may be. That who we are, rather than what we do, is what truly matters, for nobody can take away things that come from the heart. When you experience that year of coaching, don't wait too long to realize you are always a teacher and a provider of hope. Love your kids, embrace your staff, and know who you are and what you know to be true. You will survive. Tina Slinker is head women's basketball coach and senior woman administrator at the University of North Texas. Opinions -- Players perform their best when motivated by respect
David Stern, commissioner "Of course, we'd rather that players go through college. But just look at those two young girls. One (Martina Hingis) is 16 and is the world's top-ranked woman tennis player, the other (Tara Lipinsky) is 14 and is the world figure skating champion.... "We'd like to see a college Final Four with Stephon Marbury, Allen Iverson and some of the others who have opted to come into the NBA early. They're more mature at 23 than they are at 19, there's no question. "But, on the other hand, look who the elder statesmen is who's criticizing them -- Charles Barkley. I'd like to go back through our records and find out how many times Charles was fined for misbehavior when he was younger."
Wendy Larry, women's basketball coach On the prospect that new women's professional basketball leagues might encourage women's college basketball players to turn professional early: "I would hate to see the colleges raped of players. I still think in a woman's mind, a degree should be very important, too. But obviously, with a pro league, that's kind of a naive thought....I think soon someone will challenge the fact that they can't come out of high school and play professional (basketball). It won't be long before there's a tremendous legal battle over the opportunity to go directly from high school to the pros. I don't foresee it as too far away."
Pat Summitt, women's basketball coach "We just now have established the college game, and it's hot right now. If we take the best players out of it, then we're not going to have high-profile players like Chamique Holdsclaw and some of the others. "You still have some good young players that we need to keep in the college game and put our best foot forward there. "You look at a player like Chamique, and I think she could play in the league right now. But I have Chamique's grandmother on my side and she tells me she wants her to get a degree. We want a couple of more Final Four appearances out of her, too."
Title IX
Gary Thorne, writer "Women's sports are just as fiercely contested and as important to the players as any men's game. There was a time when the public perceived women's sports as a sidelight to the men's games. Women's games were events held at odd hours, with little attention paid to them. No more. There are many who wish women's sports would go back to the sidelines. Many men's team coaches take that attitude privately. "They detest Title IX, that federal law that seeks equal opportunity for women in college sports. Title IX works, even if unevenly and sometimes too much by raw comparative numbers. "There is no way women's basketball would be at its current level of success were it not for Title IX. That law created opportunities for women. The law expanded women's programs at the college level and forced the 'old boys' system to bring women's games from the sidelines to center court. In turn, that energized women at the high-school level to improve themselves and compete for college positions. "The results are nowhere more evident than at the NCAA women's tournament. The intensity, the excellence, and the joys and pains are the results of opportunity. "The memories to be taken from the games by the women will impact their lives no less than those of the men. All those attributes we attach to sports as a reason for their existence -- work ethic, interaction, discipline, etc. -- are there for women, too. "And thanks to those women players, we all come to realize gender equality is right, as a matter of everyday life, not just in the arena. By seeing the effort, the soul bared in competition, we better understand that inside, the heart that beats in women is just as strong as the heart that beats in men. "The wave still begins as a ripple. In our corner of the ocean, the Maine women's basketball team struck a chord that rang true. "Their effort, desire, and, yes, talent speak volumes for why opportunity is essential before there can be success."
Gambling
Rick Pitino, men's basketball coach "I'm talking about where it gets to the point where people want information that could help them place a bet, and that's where you really have to guard yourself. "I tell the players that any time someone asks you if you're healthy, walk as far away from them as you possibly can.... "Gambling is a problem in society like drugs. It's a major problem in our society today and because of all of those casinos that are (being built), you're going to have a lot of degenerate gamblers." |