Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

[RabbitObsessed]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

Too late.

Wrong.

[zooropa]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

Wrong.

And your argument in support of your position is.............?

---

Let's say you've got a degree in math.

What do you think is most useful to you:

-your diploma-

or

-understanding the relationship between infinite series, derivatives, integrals, and the fundamental theorem of calculus-

Knowledge is only meaningful when it exists in a framework. It is only meaningful when you can connect each new piece of information to your larger understanding of the subject and, ultimately, the world around you.

If your advisor is not assisting you, and you yourself are not putting the knowledge you are acquiring into a coherent and rational framework, then you are not really learning anything.

At the end of four years, you'll have a diploma, and that's about it. You will have missed your chance to really learn something, and having someone come up to you and say, "your degree means you can do this" really doesn't make a difference.

[SoDakJack]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

And your argument in support of your position is.............?

---

Let's say you've got a degree in math.

What do you think is most useful to you:

-your diploma-

or

-understanding the relationship between infinite series, derivatives, integrals, and the fundamental theorem of calculus-

Knowledge is only meaningful when it exists in a framework. It is only meaningful when you can connect each new piece of information to your larger understanding of the subject and, ultimately, the world around you.

If your advisor is not assisting you, and you yourself are not putting the knowledge you are acquiring into a coherent and rational framework, then you are not really learning anything.

At the end of four years, you'll have a diploma, and that's about it. You will have missed your chance to really learn something, and having someone come up to you and say, "your degree means you can do this" really doesn't make a difference.

I guess I don't see it as an institution's problem that a kid doesn't want to take the effort to learn what their degree does. I didn't need anyone to hold my hand thru college and then tell me what to do when I was done.

There is no suck thing as a "meaningless" degree. Perhaps there are "listless" people with degrees, but once you have that paper in a frame you open alot of doors that aren't even in the field you studied.

[zooropa]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

I guess I don't see it as an institution's problem that a kid doesn't want to take the effort to learn what their degree does.

Of course it's ultimately the student's responsibility.

But do you think these student athletes--especially scholarship athletes at BCS schools in basketball and football--enter college with a realistic idea of their future prospects, and the necessity of investing time and effort in their education?

When you read of someone like Katie Budahl who wanted more balance between athletics and academics, and she's in swim/dive, for cryin' out loud, doesn't it make you wonder what these 'academic' advisors are doing at BCS schools?

The kid has to make his/her own decision, but the advisor should be facilitating decisions that are in the kids' best interests.

None of us outgrow the need for good advice, and 18-22 year old kids certainly benefit from good guidance--or at the very least, it won't kill them.

[1stRowFANatic]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

When you read of someone like Katie Budahl who wanted more balance between athletics and academics, and she's in swim/dive, for cryin' out loud, doesn't it make you wonder what these 'academic' advisors are doing at BCS schools?

I am going to come from this as some one that tried to find and hire a registered dietician. Let's just put it this way, they are hard to come by and demand a lot because they can get it. Not unlike some other professions that attract high salaries, part of the reason that they are in demand is because the programs they come from are very selective and demanding. It aint easy getting there.

I vaguely remember the article about Budahl, but don't remember any specifics. Zoo, your arguments are premised on the fact that the side of the balance that was weighing her down was the athletic side. Given the program she was in, it may have been the academic side.

I don't know and don't care why Budahl transferred, it could have been either side. But you questioned what the academic advisors are doing, maybe they were telling her you need to put more effort into your degree program.

You also threw the sociology program under the bus earlier, (not that there is anything wrong with that), all for the purposes of trying to make a point on a fan board. Just to let you know, I started in engineering, was bored out of mind while pullling down a GPA well over 3.5. Sociology and HPER were much more challenging to me, and my grades showed it. I don't know what degree you got from SDSU, but I respect the effort anybody puts into getting any degree.

And besides, we all know why a PE degree is the hardest of all to achieve.
The reeds for underwater-basket weaving float.



Even though I respect my degrees, I can still joke about them.

[RabbitObsessed]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

And your argument in support of your position is.............?

That you aren't right.

[UWMandSDSU]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

That you aren't right.

Your reply was "meaningless"!

[SDSUAlum08]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

To a certain point. But they can never take the degree away from that person, so I disagree with you that getting a degree is meaningless.

Agreed.

[filbert]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

Sadly, this thread missed out on the nomination for Epically Ridiculous On So Many Levels Thread Of The Decade (Or Of The Millennium So Far) Award to the "Nagy must STAY" thread.

Must be something about threads discussing coaches that brings out the best in people.

[zooropa]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

your arguments are premised on the fact that the side of the balance that was weighing her down was the athletic side. Given the program she was in, it may have been the academic side.

Except the article made a point of how she was spending less time in the pool at SDSU. She was spending less time on the athletic side of things at SDSU.

You also threw the sociology program under the bus earlier, (not that there is anything wrong with that), all for the purposes of trying to make a point on a fan board.

Did I throw sociology under the bus?

I did not.

But when three of seven Duke basketball players with declared majors all opt for sociology (2002), there's an indication that the school is 'steering' people into that major for one reason or another.

I took criminology with Bob Mendelsohn in sociology, and my degree is in visual art, I am well aware of the challenges involved in obtaining a liberal arts degree. And I certainly am not going to call any major 'easy'.

But I also know that liberal arts degrees lend themselves to an athlete's schedule (few labs, few or no studios, often a heavy emphasis on reading), and that a few cooperative professors in a major can grease the path without ever running afoul of NCAA regs.

[1stRowFANatic]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

Of course, I think there are no shortage of regular undergrads who end up with degrees that are quite incomprehensible to them, to accompany student athletes that wanted to be engineers and who ended up with degrees in sociology (not that I'm knocking sociology).

If that's not throwing it under the bus, we have different definitions.

And seriously, your argument is based on the academic advisors at Duke? The school is regarded as one of the best schools in the country. It is also regularly held out as a school that doesn't lower its standards and is still able to keep competing at a national level. Yet you use Duke's academic advisors as an example when 3 out of how many basketball players had declared sociology as major? What is that 20% of the team is sociology majors, or in other words 80% is not. Even if you go with the declared major students it is less than half. And that is your evidence of the academic advisors steering kids into a program "with cooperative professors."

What do you call that, opinion stated as fact?

[zooropa]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

If that's not throwing it under the bus, we have different definitions.

And seriously, your argument is based on the academic advisors at Duke? The school is regarded as one of the best schools in the country. It is also regularly held out as a school that doesn't lower its standards and is still able to keep competing at a national level. Yet you use Duke's academic advisors as an example when 3 out of how many basketball players had declared sociology as major? What is that 20% of the team is sociology majors, or in other words 80% is not. Even if you go with the declared major students it is less than half. And that is your evidence of the academic advisors steering kids into a program "with cooperative professors."

What do you call that, opinion stated as fact?

If your goal is to play ball and get then be an engineer, how does a degree in sociology help you out? (the exact scenario I outlined)

Yes, ultimately, a student is responsible for his own education, but as Brando said in "On the Waterfront", 'Charlie, you shoulda looked out for me.'

And yeah, you betcherass I'm calling Duke's practices into question--in 2002/03, a third of football players with declared majors and a quarter of all basketball players majoring in sociology?

This problem is so widespread it's got a name: 'clustering'.

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2006/07/20/sports
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...s-majors_x.htm

----

Look. As long as college athletics brings in billions of dollars, concentrated around a few dozen schools, this is going to be an issue. And that's going to be for the foreseeable future. This problem isn't going to go away.

It's just going to morph from one form to another. At least NOW a significant number of students are graduating WITH degrees. That's better than it used to be. The value of these degrees, IMO, is dubious, but at least they ARE degrees from NameBrand(TM) universities.

But if you think kids aren't being steered into majors that smooth their paths as athletes...................................

[JackJD]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

Zooropa: I'm only going to make one statement in this thread (thinking back to 1stRowRANatic's explanation of a couple of degrees)
Dietetics is not a book by L. Ron Hubbard and Dietetics has nothing to do with Scientology.

Just wanted to make sure we have an understanding on that.


Oh, and, if your percentage body-fat is less than five per cent, then perhaps you can question the value of a dietician. Personally, I think the way America is growing (and I don't mean increase in population), dieticians have great job security. SDSU produces great graduates with that degree.

[JackJD]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

Are we losing some athletic recruits because certain majors don't fit with athletics? This is a complex question. It has much to do with availability of facilities, numbers of classes offered, availability of teaching staff etc. Availability of facilities mean athletic facilities, too. Until we get the new science facilities on line, we won't see many athletes studying Pharmacy and, perhaps, nursing. Do we have any basketball players, men or women, who are Pharmacy majors? We did in the past. Any nursing majors? There were some in the past. I think the improved engineering facilities may make it more condusive for athletes who want to be engineers to take advantage of our fine engineering degrees.

Okay, I made more than one statement on this thread.

I'm going out for pie.

[bigticket1]

Re: Lickliter, Fife, Hunter

Are we losing some athletic recruits because certain majors don't fit with athletics? This is a complex question. It has much to do with availability of facilities, numbers of classes offered, availability of teaching staff etc. Availability of facilities mean athletic facilities, too. Until we get the new science facilities on line, we won't see many athletes studying Pharmacy and, perhaps, nursing. Do we have any basketball players, men or women, who are Pharmacy majors? We did in the past. Any nursing majors? There were some in the past. I think the improved engineering facilities may make it more condusive for athletes who want to be engineers to take advantage of our fine engineering degrees.

Okay, I made more than one statement on this thread.

I'm going out for pie.

I believe one of the women players who left the team to concentrate on her studies is a pharmacy major.