CHeats in the news again

[UrinalCake]

In a report to congress on academic fraud in college sports, Mary Willingham (remember her?) made the case that universities are failing student athletes by failing to provide an adequate education as promised to them.

link (https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article233059037.html)

Not exactly ground-breaking news, but further evidence that the CHeats cheated. And to be fair, the report points to a more widespread issue across all of college athletics.

[MarkD83]

In a report to congress on academic fraud in college sports, Mary Willingham (remember her?) made the case that universities are failing student athletes by failing to provide an adequate education as promised to them.

link (https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article233059037.html)

Not exactly ground-breaking news, but further evidence that the CHeats cheated. And to be fair, the report points to a more widespread issue across all of college athletics.

Why be fair...20 years of academic fraud at one institution is more than enough reason for this to be an issue.....

[chrishoke]

In a Dan Kane article the day before, he stated that the heels were not alone, that many Duke athletes majored in sociology, a so-called easy major. NCS was also mentioned.

[Reddevil]

In a Dan Kane article the day before, he stated that the heels were not alone, that many Duke athletes majored in sociology, a so-called easy major. NCS was also mentioned.

That always bugs me. Most of us realize that "easier" is a relative term, and far different from doing nothing. Walking is easier than running, but it still gets you down the road. Sitting does not. I am tired of people making stupid statements because there are a lot of stupid people that believe them.

[JasonEvans]

If Duke athletes who majored in Sociology do approximately the same amount of work as regular students who pursue that major, and I don't think anyone has ever asserted otherwise, then this is the biggest non-issue nothingburger ever. To even begin to equate or compare that to Carolina running a sham department where athletes were given degrees without doing any meaningful work, and where the athletic department encouraged this activity as a way of giving the athletes more time to focus on athletics and not be bogged down with academics, is like comparing apples to nuclear missiles.

[dukelifer]

In a Dan Kane article the day before, he stated that the heels were not alone, that many Duke athletes majored in sociology, a so-called easy major. NCS was also mentioned.

This is true- but many athletes majored in other things as well- some one or two off- Trajan was Math Major, Shane a Religion Major. I am amazed at the players who can graduate with Engineering degrees. This article said the most common major for football players at Duke in 2016 was Evolutionary Anthropology. At UNC Exercise Science, NC State- Exploratory Studies. I have no idea what Exploratory studies is as a major.


https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2658255-most-popular-academic-majors-for-2016-power-5-conference-football-players#slide1

[Highlander]

This is true- but many athletes majored in other things as well- some one or two off- Trajan was Math Major, Shane a Religion Major. I am amazed at the players who can graduate with Engineering degrees. This article said the most common major for football players at Duke in 2016 was Evolutionary Anthropology. At UNC Exercise Science, NC State- Exploratory Studies. I have no idea what Exploratory studies is as a major.


https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2658255-most-popular-academic-majors-for-2016-power-5-conference-football-players#slide1

I think "Exploratory Studies" is a major created primarily for athletes whereby they take intro level classes across a large number of fields, but don't specialize in anything. Then they are awarded a degree. I have heard it called "General Studies" at SEC schools. Bottom line - it's a major in name only created to satisfy NCAA bylaws.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

This reflects just as poorly on the recruits the Cheats get as it does the Cheats themselves IMO.

[dchen09]

So I'm not defending the CHEATS per se, but I would like to offer another viewpoint on this whole issue. Many of us think of college as primarily institutions for training white collared professionals. If you take that narrow view, then yes, it's entirely true that colleges are failing athletes. However, if you take the view that college is simply a post-high school level training in whatever field their interested in, then you can argue that "sports" IS what athletes major in. The academic "major" is actually a minor. Put it this way, I wonder how many athletes go on to a sports related career, which they otherwise could not have. We don't necessarily dissuade kids from going into religion, education, or child development. Yet those all have extremely poor starting salaries (<$40k).

[BLPOG]

If Duke athletes who majored in Sociology do approximately the same amount of work as regular students who pursue that major, and I don't think anyone has ever asserted otherwise, then this is the biggest non-issue nothingburger ever. To even begin to equate or compare that to Carolina running a sham department where athletes were given degrees without doing any meaningful work, and where the athletic department encouraged this activity as a way of giving the athletes more time to focus on athletics and not be bogged down with academics, is like comparing apples to nuclear missiles.

And as has been pointed out many times on this board, Duke's undergraduate degree options are sometimes more limited (in the sense of being broader categories) than at many other institutions, with specialties pursued as certificates and the like within majors.* Sociology has one in particular that is one interest to athletes - I can't recall the exact name, but it's something like finance** and can be pursued with an angle toward sports and marketing - and that's the reason many Duke athletes have historically taken the major. Shame on Dan Kane for not doing his research.

*As another example, Duke has 4 undergraduate engineering majors. NC State has 18, and the range of specializations in other things like certificates is similarly far larger/more specific.

**Significantly, there is no undergraduate finance major at Duke

[IrishDevil]

And as has been pointed out many times on this board, Duke's undergraduate degree options are sometimes more limited (in the sense of being broader categories) than at many other institutions, with specialties pursued as certificates and the like within majors.* Sociology has one in particular that is one interest to athletes - I can't recall the exact name, but it's something like finance** and can be pursued with an angle toward sports and marketing - and that's the reason many Duke athletes have historically taken the major. Shame on Dan Kane for not doing his research.

*As another example, Duke has 4 undergraduate engineering majors. NC State has 18, and the range of specializations in other things like certificates is similarly far larger/more specific.

**Significantly, there is no undergraduate finance major at Duke

When I was obtaining my sociology degree at Duke, this was the Markets and Management certificate, and yes, I believe BLPOG's description of its attraction to athletes is accurate. I only remember taking one of those classes, a management/business ethics course. I don't believe there were any basketball players in the course that semester, though plenty of business-focused students, econ majors, etc. A few football players as well, though I was not familiar enough with the team at the time to note names. I do recall seeing basketball players - Shelden comes to mind, Dockery too - in my core sociology classes like theory and clinical research methods, attending and participating. Those are particularly dear memories, reassuring me in the post-CHeat world and insulating me from unthinking and unfounded snark about the supposed underwater basketweaving coursework in the sociology department.

[sagegrouse]

When I was obtaining my sociology degree at Duke, this was the Markets and Management certificate, and yes, I believe BLPOG's description of its attraction to athletes is accurate. I only remember taking one of those classes, a management/business ethics course. I don't believe there were any basketball players in the course that semester, though plenty of business-focused students, econ majors, etc. A few football players as well, though I was not familiar enough with the team at the time to note names. I do recall seeing basketball players - Shelden comes to mind, Dockery too - in my core sociology classes like theory and clinical research methods, attending and participating. Those are particularly dear memories, reassuring me in the post-CHeat world and insulating me from unthinking and unfounded snark about the supposed underwater basketweaving coursework in the sociology department.

Back in my day, the less academically inclined of my friends would sign up for "Plastic Art in the Public Schools." Let me tell you, one of the guys did some awesome stabiles and mobiles.

[scottdude8]

If Duke athletes who majored in Sociology do approximately the same amount of work as regular students who pursue that major, and I don't think anyone has ever asserted otherwise, then this is the biggest non-issue nothingburger ever. To even begin to equate or compare that to Carolina running a sham department where athletes were given degrees without doing any meaningful work, and where the athletic department encouraged this activity as a way of giving the athletes more time to focus on athletics and not be bogged down with academics, is like comparing apples to nuclear missiles.

This is the KEY point in this entire debate, and the false equivalency argument that many put forth when it comes to the UNC scandal. Every university has "easier" majors and "harder" majors, no matter what the administration says, and students know this. A certain type of student comes to school just to have fun and get a rubber stamp degree, and they can almost always find a way to do that. If athletes decide to take this route, than so be it. The point of difference is when either A) student athletes are forced into these "easier" majors or B) student athletes have access to "easier" options that the general student populace does not. By all accounts the UNCheats scandal involved both A and B.

For some context, consider the following: I knew a lot of pre-law students during my time at Duke. For whatever reason, it's well known that law schools look strictly on the "numbers", i.e. your GPA and LSAT scores, and don't look at the broader context of what courses made up your degree (like, say, a PhD program does). So some of my less scrupulous pre-law friends purposely took courses that they knew would give them A's, even if they weren't necessarily the most useful courses, to boost their GPA. If this is an option that the average student can take, no matter how much we may frown upon it, there's nothing shady if a student athlete does something similar.

But an entire department full of sham courses that are more or less only available to student athletes, and those student athletes were reportedly "forced" into taking those useless classes? That's an entirely different beast. We need to differentiate what happened at UNC from the general issues with the "student" portion of "student athlete", because they're entirely different topics.

[scottdude8]

I think "Exploratory Studies" is a major created primarily for athletes whereby they take intro level classes across a large number of fields, but don't specialize in anything. Then they are awarded a degree. I have heard it called "General Studies" at SEC schools. Bottom line - it's a major in name only created to satisfy NCAA bylaws.

Be careful here. The "General Studies" major, while shady (Michigan has something similar, I believe), is still available to the general student public (I taught non-athlete undergrads at Michigan who were going to major in one of these "iffy" majors). If that's the case, that's a university wide problem, and a separate issue from the UNC scandal.

[uh_no]

Be careful here. The "General Studies" major, while shady (Michigan has something similar, I believe), is still available to the general student public (I taught non-athlete undergrads at Michigan who were going to major in one of these "iffy" majors). If that's the case, that's a university wide problem, and a separate issue from the UNC scandal.

duke has "Program II" which at least in theory is cut from the same jib. It allows you to construct your own major, with i think the only requirement being you have to take 8 classes in any two departments, and pretty much whatever else you want. With 8 classes, you would have to take a couple upper level courses, but I know people who used it simply to avoid taking certain courses which would otherwise have been required.

Now, in practice, people in that program are still getting a great education....which is almost assuredly not the case in general for general studies programs.

[PackMan97]

Exploratory Studies @ NCSU is the biggest fake news EVER!

https://advising.dasa.ncsu.edu/welcome-to-exploratory-studies/


Thinking about what major is right for you?

Exploratory Studies is a comprehensive program designed to meet the needs of first-year students who wish to explore their options in order to find a “best fit” major. With a focus on cross-curricular academic advising, career assessment, guided exploration of majors and careers, and programming to allow students opportunities to interact with advisors, faculty, upper-class students and professionals from different fields, our students are able to discover their passions and make an informed decision on a major.

Exploratory Studies students typically make up 10-15% of each NC State first-year entering the class. Alumni from our program are in every college at the University, and our students are actively engaged in university life.

...

Since our program’s founding in 1995 (as the First Year College), we have had the privilege of working with thousands of talented and creative students on the path to their degree. We are committed to ensuring that our students have the skills, knowledge, and experiences to transition successfully to a major that fulfills their goals.


You can't actually get a degree in Exploratory Studies, but that is basically our "Freshman undesignated" label. My wife could have really used this. I think she had 5 different declared majors in her first year and a half at NC State. :)

One thing it does say for NC State is that there is no large cluster major for NC State athletes that is greater than all the freshman that chose "Exploratory Studies".

[DevilHorse]

Be careful here. The "General Studies" major, while shady (Michigan has something similar, I believe), is still available to the general student public (I taught non-athlete undergrads at Michigan who were going to major in one of these "iffy" majors). If that's the case, that's a university wide problem, and a separate issue from the UNC scandal.

Ooo and Maybe they can specialize and have a Science Major made up of Science Classes. Not any particular ones, but hard ones and soft ones, certainly Big Science.
You'd have to take math; hard math, easy math, round math, and perhaps amorphous math for the theoretical Science majors.
Perhaps Statistics for when the bowling machine doesn't keep your score for you.

Larry
DevilHorse

[scottdude8]

duke has "Program II" which at least in theory is cut from the same jib. It allows you to construct your own major, with i think the only requirement being you have to take 8 classes in any two departments, and pretty much whatever else you want. With 8 classes, you would have to take a couple upper level courses, but I know people who used it simply to avoid taking certain courses which would otherwise have been required.

Now, in practice, people in that program are still getting a great education...which is almost assuredly not the case in general for general studies programs.

To be fair, I knew people on both sides of the Program II coin. Some used it as a way to construct an easier major, but I ALSO directly knew students who used Program II as a way to construct a unique topic of study that wouldn't have otherwise been possible given the constraints of a traditional major. Again, it's the type of thing that I'm sure can (and has) been used to get an easy degree, but let's not paint with too broad of a brush.

[budwom]

I remember way back when (1980s is a decent guess) when they'd routinely show players' majors before football games on TV, and I remember unc was ultra heavy on the Parks and Recreation majors.....squirrel management is nothing to be scoffed at.

[PackMan97]

I remember way back when (1980s is a decent guess) when they'd routinely show players' majors before football games on TV, and I remember unc was ultra heavy on the Parks and Recreation majors....squirrel management is nothing to be scoffed at.

NC State has always had a fair number of parks and rec majors among our athletes. To be fair, an athlete who is looking to continue to be involved in athletics is going to select a major that will further that goal. It's the reason a lot of Tarheels choose Exercise and Sports Science. Both majors lend themselves to being outdoors, to continuing involvement in athletics as a professional after their career is over. In the case of XSS at Caroline, the fact they are a known source of a paper classes doesn't hurt their appeal :)

I have no problem with athletes wanting to take these majors. It is akin to asking why so many of the math nerds in high school are going on to major in Math and related majors in college. Well, duh!

[MCFinARL]

When I was obtaining my sociology degree at Duke, this was the Markets and Management certificate, and yes, I believe BLPOG's description of its attraction to athletes is accurate. I only remember taking one of those classes, a management/business ethics course. I don't believe there were any basketball players in the course that semester, though plenty of business-focused students, econ majors, etc. A few football players as well, though I was not familiar enough with the team at the time to note names. I do recall seeing basketball players - Shelden comes to mind, Dockery too - in my core sociology classes like theory and clinical research methods, attending and participating. Those are particularly dear memories, reassuring me in the post-CHeat world and insulating me from unthinking and unfounded snark about the supposed underwater basketweaving coursework in the sociology department.

My non-athlete daughter, Trinity '08, got an MMS certificate along with her Psychology major--and it helped to make her employable since she did not want to pursue an advanced degree in psychology. There were athletes in her classes from time to time, as often ones in the non-revenue sports as basketball or football players. She found the MMS classes easier than Econ classes (her minor), but they were real classes performing a useful function, and since they were officially in the Sociology department, that would be a logical major choice for people whose main interest might be in sports-related business.

As noted by other posters, "easy majors" have been around pretty much forever, for athletes and non-athletes. And it's not unusual at a lot of schools for athletes to be "encouraged" to take easy majors, especially if they are not sure what they want to study. But there is a huge difference between an "easy major" and sham classes, and it also makes a difference whether the athlete has the flexibility to take whatever major he/she wants, regardless of difficulty.

[uh_no]

To be fair, I knew people on both sides of the Program II coin. Some used it as a way to construct an easier major, but I ALSO directly knew students who used Program II as a way to construct a unique topic of study that wouldn't have otherwise been possible given the constraints of a traditional major. Again, it's the type of thing that I'm sure can (and has) been used to get an easy degree, but let's not paint with too broad of a brush.

I don't mean to condemn program 2, by any means, it's a great option if nothing quite fits what you want to do...but only to draw an analogy to "general studies," which can likely be used to similar ends.