More info on UNC academic scandal

[roywhite]

UNC's Naval Weapons Systems class attracted basketball players

The latest from Dan Kane and his colleagues at the N&O.

Enrollment records requested by The News & Observer show that the department had become a popular place for athletes. One class particularly stands out: Naval Weapons Systems, or NAVS 302, which met in the spring of 2007. Of 38 students in the class, 30 were athletes.

Six of those were members of the men’s basketball team. The class’s average grade that semester was 3.63, or better than a B-plus, and the class’ work requirements were deemed so difficult to assess that its structure was later changed

[gumbomoop]

UNC's Naval Weapons Systems class attracted basketball players

The latest from Dan Kane and his colleagues at the N&O.

Thanks for the tip from roywhite. Kane's latest is a must-read.

I've no idea [that's a lie, of course] whether the Naval Weapons Systems course was "questionable." But if it was, it's rather more questionable than Kane implies, for a 3.63 is not merely "better than a B+." It's essentially an A-, as an A- = 3.67, whereas a B+ = 3.33. Any student whose GPA is 3.63 would not say, "My GPA is better than a B+." She'd say, "MY GPA is right at an A-." And she'd be right.

Kane's got some scoop on several other Naval Science courses in which athletes performed, let's say, remarkably well.

[Greg_Newton]

Another interesting part of the article is that most of the course's grading was based on a 2-page, double-spaced paper and a 5-person, 20-minute group presentation. That's about an hour of work per credit hour...

[BigWayne]

UNC's Naval Weapons Systems class attracted basketball players

The latest from Dan Kane and his colleagues at the N&O.

I seem to remember there being a course at Duke in my days there that was affectionately called "Guns and Boats" that was reported to be on the easy side. I didn't take it so my memory may not be accurate.

[cspan37421]

a 3.63 is not merely "better than a B+." It's essentially an A-, as an A- = 3.67, whereas a B+ = 3.33. Any student whose GPA is 3.63 would not say, "My GPA is better than a B+." She'd say, "MY GPA is right at an A-." And she'd be right.

A minor point but in my day at Duke (late 80s), B+ was 3.3 and A- was 3.7, and not from rounding. Interestingly, A+ was the same as A; i.e., if you got two A- and two A+, that semester's GPA would be a 3.85, not a 4.0.

[cspan37421]

To Kane's article:

"You sunk my flagship!"

Oh, this is getting to the point of an SNL skit.

[ForkFondler]

"The syllabus for the NAVS 302 class shows that it was a different type of course than in other years."

On the face of it, NAVS 302 sounds like it might just be a crip course. But, if "other years" means both before and after, then it's another story.

But in any case, a 2-page paper for a 300 level course, really??

[Cameron]

"The syllabus for the NAVS 302 class shows that it was a different type of course than in other years."

On the face of it, NAVS 302 sounds like it might just be a crip course. But, if "other years" means both before and after, then it's another story.

But in any case, a 2-page paper for a 300 level course, really??

Perhaps in lieu of the other 10 or 12 pages that students at other universities would have to write, they just ran Michigans?

Running as a replacement for research seems reasonable enough to me. Kind of reminds me of Charlie Kelly's resume on the TV show It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, the contents of which consist entirely of a photograph of Bruce Jenner -- in order to demonstrate Charlie's never-give-up attitude. I imagine some of the resumes on the Carolina basketball team are somewhat similar. Maybe a collage of Sam Perkins' greatest moments or something.

[roywhite]

"The syllabus for the NAVS 302 class shows that it was a different type of course than in other years."

On the face of it, NAVS 302 sounds like it might just be a crip course. But, if "other years" means both before and after, then it's another story.

But in any case, a 2-page paper for a 300 level course, really??

Courses that are relatively easy, or have a large percentage of athletes among those enrolled, are not unusual at almost any school. This one seems lighter in terms of requirements and more generous in grading than most. And it's notable that it involves a department other than AFAM.

I guess the question here is whether, or to what degree, this particular course was arranged with academic advisors who worked with scholarship athletes. Did the athletic department get involved with setting up this class, or persuading the instructor to minimize the work and maximize the grades given? Did the instructor somehow end up with courtside seats or an extra stipend?

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

I seem to remember there being a course at Duke in my days there that was affectionately called "Guns and Boats" that was reported to be on the easy side. I didn't take it so my memory may not be accurate.

Yes, there was a history course many called "Guns and Boats." I didn't take it either, but I did take some other courses that were supposed to be easy and found that was not the case!

[PackMan97]

DBR Commentary on the news story:

Given that the class was set up and administered by the Navy, it’s hard to see how it fits in with the scandal. Were athletes steered to an easy class? No doubt. But it was a legitimate class and not one designed for their benefit. You could call it a waste of time and not be far off, but it’s not an academic fraud.

I think you fine folks at the DBR are missing some of the more important parts of this story.

The syllabus for the NAVS 302 class shows that it was a different type of course than in other years. It had no required exams or quizzes and no major research paper

This sets up that this particular section of NAVS 302 was different than prior courses

The professor for the class, Lt. Brian Lubitz, taught it only once, UNC records show. A former captain for the Naval Academy soccer team, he also was earning his MBA from UNC’s Kenan-Flagler Business School at the time

This sets up that the professor only taught the course once and had ties to UNC as an MBA student.

One of the basketball players, Bobby Frasor, now director of basketball operations at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, said he and his teammates took the class after the class instructor discussed it with counselors in the Academic Support Program for Student Athletes, a program that helps athletes stay eligible academically to play sports.

“He told our academic advisers, but I had never heard of the class, and basically, our academic adviser recommended it and we enrolled in it,” Frasor said.

So, we've established that the syllabus for this one section of the course is different than all others, that the professor only taught it this one time and that the professor talked to the academic support program which in turn steered students toward this course.

It was the only NAVS 302 class over the past six years in which basketball players enrolled, records show.

Any questions?

I would not surprise me at all if there is a pattern of clustering athletes in courses in which there is an atypical syllabus with a professor that doesn't normally teach that class in which athletes are steered into. My feeling is that Kane is setting up this angle in which courses are modified for and then stuffed with athletes.

[sagegrouse]

I seem to remember there being a course at Duke in my days there that was affectionately called "Guns and Boats" that was reported to be on the easy side. I didn't take it so my memory may not be accurate.

Yes, there was a history course many called "Guns and Boats." I didn't take it either, but I did take some other courses that were supposed to be easy and found that was not the case!

Professor Theodore Ropp was an accomplished military historian who taught an undergraduate course every year. I don't think it was an easy course.

sagegrouse

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

Professor Theodore Ropp was an accomplished military historian who taught an undergraduate course every year. I don't think it was an easy course.

sagegrouse

You've confirmed my vague recall about what I thought I heard others say about the course.

[jimsumner]

This probably says more about me than anything else, but I do not recall any of my classes at Duke as being easy.

[loran16]

This probably says more about me than anything else, but I do not recall any of my classes at Duke as being easy.

Not to take anything away from your experience Jim, but I took a marketing class my last semester at duke that was easy and had athletes in it (such as Thad Lewis )

Of course while it wasn't tough, it did have a legit final paper/project to grade.

Every school has these types of classes. But they have to actually be classes and can't be tailored exclusively for athletes as unc seems to have done

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

This probably says more about me than anything else, but I do not recall any of my classes at Duke as being easy.

This is a truth many are unable or refuse to acknowledge.

[Jderf]

This probably says more about me than anything else, but I do not recall any of my classes at Duke as being easy.

No doubt Duke is a very tough university, academically speaking, but let's not kid ourselves into thinking there are not classes which, if subjected to scrutiny, would draw enormous amounts of ridicule.

I know of someone who took Physics 49S for his freshman year seminar. The only assignment for the entire course was a class presentation, with an accompanying ten-page write up. He improvised the whole presentation (on theories of the end of the universe), his only preparation being 8 or so Power Point slides with a couple bullet points on each. His "write up" was 10 pages-worth of Wikipedia articles, in quotation marks, ending with "-- Wikipedia." He had thereby completed the course four weeks in, and for the rest of the semester he simply showed up every day to cruise to an A.

I kid you not.

[cspan37421]

No doubt Duke is a very tough university, academically speaking, but let's not kid ourselves into thinking there are not classes which, if subjected to scrutiny, would draw enormous amounts of ridicule.

I know of someone who took Physics 49S for his freshman year seminar. The only assignment for the entire course was a class presentation, with an accompanying ten-page write up. He improvised the whole presentation (on theories of the end of the universe), his only preparation being 8 or so Power Point slides with a couple bullet points on each. His "write up" was 10 pages-worth of Wikipedia articles, in quotation marks, ending with "-- Wikipedia." He had thereby completed the course four weeks in, and for the rest of the semester he simply showed up every day to cruise to an A.

I kid you not.

I was ready to mount my high horse and reply with "* Citation Needed" and then with a couple clicks I found this:

http://www.phy.duke.edu/~myhan/049course.pdf

I don't think I had a course at Duke for which the grade was based upon fewer than 3 exams, papers, or a combination thereof. Maybe even 4. Also, I don't think I had a single course in which attendance or class participation counted toward the grade.

[JasonEvans]

I don't think I had a course at Duke for which the grade was based upon fewer than 3 exams, papers, or a combination thereof. Maybe even 4. Also, I don't think I had a single course in which attendance or class participation counted toward the grade.

I took a history class without any tests (IIRC) where your entire grade was based on a 1-2 page paper you wrote before each class on a specific debate topic from history. You then had to discuss and defend your debate topic with/against the rest of the class each class period. There were like 10-12 students in the class and I often prided myself on taking the less obvious side of the debate and attempting to convince the rest of the class of my position. I would say that a good 75% of your grade was class participation... though you had to do a good bit of research and reading to participate in any meaningful fashion.

I consider it one of the most intellectually challenging classes I took. Dean Wilson taught it. It rocked!!

-Jason "for the record, there were no athletes is the class" Evans

[cspan37421]

Dean Wilson taught it. It rocked!!

Was that the pre-law dean? I remember meeting with him once. Glad you liked the class. Though you view it as mostly participation, based on your description, it could be seen as very heavy in short papers, with the discussion being the follow-up, or the manifestation of your work. But I defer to you, you were there.