<p>It is likely that the bogus courses and sections were “hidden in plain sight” in the schedules. For example, designating a class meeting time of 8:00am to 9:00am probably takes it off most students’ radar when they are looking for classes. Of course, any class meeting time can be designated for bogus classes that do not actually meet. Having the claimed class topic be something obscure that does not get a lot of enrollment anyway may be another way of keeping the class off of students’ radar.</p>
<p>The secret was not that the classes existed. As you say, they were listed in the catalogue, and anyone could sign up. The secret was that they were not actually classes. They weren’t listed in the catalogue as AFAM 12: No Work and Easy A; they were listed as, like, AFAM 12: Culture of Southeastern Africa or something of that sort.</p>
<p>If you read the emails that are in the exhibits attached to the report, you can see how the whole thing worked. Debby Crowder was the department secretary for AFAM who ran the department because her boss, Julius Nyang’oro didn’t do anything. She was a fanatical UNC sports fan, and a woman who had herself come up from nothing. She created the phony courses for the athletes because she felt sorry for them. She also “graded” their “papers.” No professor was involved.</p>
<p>But initially only the athletes knew about the phony classes. Other students could have signed up, but they didn’t, in the main, because they thought the classes were real classes about the listed subject. Occasionally, a real student would sign up, and be confused that classes which were scheduled to meet didn’t actually meet. One of the exhibit emails is a from a confused student who wanted to study the subject, and couldn’t find the class meeting.</p>
<p>Eventually, the secret trickled out, a little. A few fraternity members found out, and told fraternity brothers about how they could raise their GPA with the fake classes. But still, the whole scheme was hush-hush; most students didn’t know about it, and the administration denies any knowledge too. Remember, this scheme went on for EIGHTEEN YEARS before being exposed. And from time to time, some student who had heard rumors would go to an advisor and ask about those easy AFAM classes. And the advisors would deny that they existed. </p>
<p>That’s what I mean by athletes preferentially taking these classes. When a football player went to his advisor with GPA trouble, he’d be steered to a phony class. In fact, he’d be enrolled in it, and then they’d tell him what his schedule was. But when a non-athlete went to his advisor and asked about those AFAM classes he’d heard rumors about, he’d be told, “There aren’t any AFAM classes where you don’t have to work, what are you talking about? Nothing to see here. Move along.”</p>
<p>“More than 3,100 students, 47.6 percent of them athletes, were enrolled in and received credit for the phantom classes,” And most of the rest were fraternity members. So, over 1000 fraternity members knew about this fraud and not one of them blew the whistle on it? That’s not even counting the ones who knew but didn’t participate.</p>
<p>"So, your argument (and apparently NCAA’s) is … "
In post #344 all I did was quote Keith Wainstein. Hunt, if you do not like the content of that report take it up with him.</p>
<p>“On a slightly more serious note, this “argument” simply shows the lengths NCAA will go to avoid sanctioning big-money programs.”</p>
<p>This statement is false.</p>
<p>The NCAA has recently sanctioned UNC for other NCAA violations. These sanctions include (from Wikipedia):</p>
<p>
[quote]
Self-imposed</p>
<p>Citing harm to its reputation, North Carolina fired Butch Davis on July 27, 2011. The next day, Dick Baddour announced that he would resign and allow chancellor Holden Thorp to hire a football head coach. Also, defensive coordinator Everett Withers was promoted to interim head coach while the university sought a permanent one.
In September 2011, North Carolina vacated all 16 wins from its 2008 and 2009 seasons.
In November 2013, North Carolina sent a disassociation letter to Austin, Little, and Quinn. </p>
<p>From the NCAA</p>
<p>On March 12, 2012, the NCAA issued formal sanctions against North Carolina football: a postseason ban for 2012, reductions of 15 scholarships, and 3 years of probation. Among the NCAA’s findings: John Blake was paid by agent Gary Wichard, to whom Blake referred players. Consequently, Blake got a three-year show-cause penalty with severe restrictions on employment at NCAA member schools.</p>
<p>McAdoo lawsuit against NCAA</p>
<p>Defensive end Michael McAdoo filed a lawsuit against the NCAA on July 1, 2011 seeking reinstatement to the North Carolina football team. This followed the NCAA finding McAdoo guilty of accepting improper benefits and committing academic fraud via coursework completed by Jennifer Wiley. The NCAA reached its verdict based on the UNC Undergraduate Honor Court finding that McAdoo committed academic dishonesty by having Jennifer Wiley complete a bibliography and works-cited section on a research paper. From this lawsuit, McAdoo was forced to make public the paper; an analysis by Dan Kane of the Raleigh News & Observer found that the Honor Court failed to find multiple instances of plagiarism in McAdoo’s paper. On July 13, a North Carolina Superior Court judge in Durham refused to grant an injunction against the NCAA, thus upholding ineligibility for McAdoo.</p>
<p>“But initially only the athletes knew about the phony classes.”</p>
<p>From the Wainstein report:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Beyond mere word-of-mouth, there were several other avenues by which non-athlete
students learned about these classes. One was through the academic advisors at the Steele Building
who assist students in planning their schedules and progress through Chapel Hill’s curriculum.</p>
<p>These advisors knew about the paper classes; they knew that Crowder controlled enrollment; and they often referred academically-challenged students to Crowder for placement in those classes.</p>
<p>Another referral venue was through the advisors for scholarship programs, including Carolina Covenant and Morehead-Cain Scholars.</p>
<p>Swimkidsdad, you and I will simply have to disagree about whether NCAA really imposes meaningful sanctions. I don’t think they do nearly enough to deter bad behavior. The money is so huge, that the sanctions would have to be huge as well. Vacating old wins? Big deal. Something that cuts off the money flow for a period of time is what is really needed.</p>
<p>I think the problem with the kind of sanctions you are suggesting Hunt, is that there is no program that isn’t going to run into problems and no program is being investigated in the same way, at all. The last two investigations into UNC were taken on by UNC, because UNC wanted to get to the bottom of it. Other institutions do not do this, nor would they do this, and they would also stonewall any kind of investigation. Furthermore, not all educational institutions are holding students to the same standards. How can you measure this? How can you measure the academic standards at Bama against those at Stanford or Duke? </p>
<p>I mean, I understand what you are saying, but I’m not sure it makes sense.</p>
<p>What would really make sense is to acknowledge the reality of the fact that we want our best athletes in our athletic programs and some of them are not the excellent students we wish they were and we need to find a way to offer them a useful education. </p>
<p>I mean, there is a reason the Ivy League decided to be in a different D1 division from UTexas. This can cut both ways if we would just be honest.</p>
<p>I’m with poetgrl. A degree from a University needs to mean something and right now at unc and others I don’t think it does. There are no standards at all for someone to graduate. For the money programs I’d bring the athlete in and say you have 2 options. You can get a degree from unc and do the work or we will have an academic program that meets your needs but you aren’t going to get a unc diploma. Meanwhile pay the guys a decent stipend and let them go pro whenever they want. </p>
<p>I don’t know if that’s poetgrl’s view, but it’s mine. And I think the stipend should be unlimited, just as coaches’ salaries are unlimited. If you want the superstar basketball player, you should have to pay superstar rates.</p>
<p>I think I referred to paid gladiators earlier in the thread. I don’t really disagree, but I don’t see that happening either.</p>
<p>No, probably not. But, it would be a better solution than whatever this is. </p>
<p>I’m not in any way defending what happened at UNC. It’s horrible and horrible to me on many levels, including the fact that a department that is really important and necessary was so devalued, which is one huge cost here, in my opinion, much bigger a cost than I think is being understood. But, at the same time, UNC commissioned two separate investigations, on top of the other two commissioned by others. I believe there have been about 9 investigations, all stemming from self-reporting. I don’t think most SEC or Big1G or even ACC schools would even do this. No. I know they wouldn’t. The NCAA would have just as soon let it drop before the governors report, even. The SAC has already investigated and ruled. </p>
<p>Now both have re-opened because UNCs Folt asked that the Wainstein people share their findings with the NCAA in an ongoing fashion.</p>
<p>So, UNC will have re opened the 2011 cases, but do you honestly believe the NCAA is investigating ALL schools at this level? No. </p>
<p>If they did, then I think we would have to really rethink our “amatuer” athlete model in the revenue sports, but the NCAA has a vested interest in keeping it amatuer, more so than anybody else, in fact.</p>
<p>Well, when Cardinal Fang and sm74 start an organization like the NCAA, then they can make the rules and pay athletes any amount to not go to class. Until then, the NCAA sets the rules and those rules say it is not an unlimited stipend to play, and the athletes have to be students and take the same classes as other students at the school. You can’t have some players in a ‘non-degree’ program. You can’t ‘pay’ some players more in head count spots as they can’t split scholarships-superstars get the same deal as the benchwarmers.</p>
<p>We can all judge, and I really doubt anyone on CC would hire any athlete from UNC because there is judgment aplenty about the value of a UNC degree granted to an athlete. Maybe that’s the ultimate penalty to the athletes, that their degrees are devalued, and all athletes will pay the price. I don’t think that will happen because I believe there are many more alums of UNC who own car dealerships and businesses who need salespeople and would love to hire a UNC athlete than there are CC members who won’t, but CC members can do their part to not hire UNC grads and bring justice back to the universe.</p>
<p>Do those car dealerships, etc. really hire football players as salespeople these days? And, in particular, do they hire black men who can barely read as salespeople?</p>
<p>I guess I can understand people thinking that fixing the problem would be difficult, or maybe not even worth it. But I’m perplexed that anybody thinks the current system isn’t broken.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is a good question. Do we have data about what happens to people who were scholarship athletes in football, but who did not become professionals? Like Hunt, I’m dubious about the employment prospects of athletes who can barely read. twoinanddone is saying that employers hire former UNC athletes, but how valuable to the car dealership is that former football player who can’t read at an adult level? Do car buyers really remember the second-stringer from ten years ago? Is that fame enough to make up for the fact that the athlete can’t read the car contract, the car specs or the current sales situation?</p>
<p><a href=“USATODAY.com - Ex-Georgia assistant's exam laughable; can you pass?”>USATODAY.com - Ex-Georgia assistant's exam laughable; can you pass?;
<p>This is a classic. If you’ve never read this famous final exam for this class at UGA, please do. Unbelievable.</p>
<p>It was a phys ed class taught by UGA asst basketball coach Jim Harrick. All the students received As; many were athletes.</p>
<p>While this UNC situation is out there, all athletic schools cut back their admissions requirements to get good players. Including Harvard, Stanford and Williams. They all also do a lot to make sure those athletes stay eligible – tutors, gut classes, etc. Harvard basketball has had some academic black eyes in the past few years, which coincided with Harvard NCAA tourney appearances.</p>
<p>Only difference is that the athletes at Harvard are much better students than the athletes at LSU. But the Harvard athletes are nowhere near where the regular Harvard students are. Just like LSU athletes aren’t where regular LSU students are.</p>
<p>It’s been this way since the 1880s fyi.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The Mississippi publics don’t have to cut back much.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.admissions.msstate.edu/freshman/requirements.php”>http://www.admissions.msstate.edu/freshman/requirements.php</a></p>
<p>I have discussed this in the past but in general for elite universities such as Harvard studies by Thomas Espenshade have shown that the admission boost given to legacies is almost identical to the admission boost given to athletes. In addition there are plenty of Ivy League football players that have GPA and SAT scores that are similar to non-athletes.</p>
<p>I think it will be interesting to see what new penalties The Southern Association of Colleges (SACs), UNC accreditation agency, will impose on UNC now that they have reopened the investigation. I think that if SACs hands out stiff penalties including placing UNC on probation it will be a strong deterrent from this sort of thing happening again. SACs should require a clear electronic audit trail which shows who and when students were registered and grades were entered to make it easier to detect fraud. I also think that the NCAA should fund independent academic fraud groups within the accreditation agencies such as SACs which would look for academic fraud and assist the NCAA in investigating fraud by student-athletes.</p>
<p>If they hand out stiff penalties for the newly acquired information, based on the Wainstein report, all they will be doing is deterring schools from investigating or sharing their information with outside sources. Public’s, like UNC will always have to share a certain amount, due to freedom of information, but they certainly don’t have to investigate themselves to this degree, and never really will. This information was not acquired by the NCAA OR SAC, it was obtained by UNC after investigation after investigation. Heavily penalizing a school for this kind of self examination won’t lead to more transparency by schools. This is a bizarre situation, to be sure, but not only because of the paper classes, also because of the way UNC has chosen to look into it.</p>
<p>Most schools do not even look into allegations at all and are investigated by outside organizations with which they do not particularly cooperate.</p>
<p>Athletes at all schools, including Duke, are taking different classes than their counterparts. At Duke the football players take their classes at Central Carolina. Any student can take classes at Central Carolina, from Duke, but that doesn’t mean they are taking classes at Duke. I’m mentioning Duke just because I know this. I can’t imagine there aren’t irregulariiies in the way revenue athletes are being educated everywhere. </p>
<p>This is not a defense of what happened at UNC, but let’s please be realistic. If we put all of our best athletes in college, only a percentage of them are going to be able to do the college level work. This is just true.</p>
<p>Here is what Espenshade et al. actually wrote:
<a href=“http://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/files/webAdmission%20Preferences%20Espenshade%20Chung%20Walling%20Dec%202004.pdf”>http://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/files/webAdmission%20Preferences%20Espenshade%20Chung%20Walling%20Dec%202004.pdf</a></p>