UNC. Bloomberg Businessweek.

[rrlbees]

http://mobile.businessweek.com/arti...scandal-unc-fails-its-athletes-whistle-blower

 

[smmCUSE]

Wow. Sparing no punches.

 

[TODDNTEXAS]

Bees, not directing this at you but to the board in general.

Academic fraud, no doubt, happens across the country but it does no good to speak in generalities. It is a problem that is shameful and should be exposed down to the high school level to be frank. Who wants to see a son or daughter not able to read or write effectively and yet still get through college? What did they really accomplish? Where is the pride and self respect? I have absolutely no problem, as a fan of college basketball and more importantly a father of two sons, if we have to regress athletically in order to progress as institutions of higher education.

We should do everything in our power to help these young men and women who come from "disadvantaged" situations to build strong foundations from Kindergarten all the way up through High School. All people should have the OPPORTUNITY to succeed in life and that should mean education and athletics. If it means we revert to four year student athletes then so be it. It means more to me that colleges and universities put out whole people and not just perfected athletes. If an individual decides education is not for them then fine. Let's move those folks on to semi-pro/minor league football and basketball.

Would you not cheer just as hard for a team composed of well prepared and educated student athletes? I believe the charade should end though. If you are so talented and gifted as an athlete and see that as your ticket to "success" in life then that should be your avenue. The same is true in several other professions including the arts.

 

[RenoHeel]

The problem with Bloomberg is that while they have done enough "research" to admit that the evidence they use for their reporting is based on one reading specialist's Masters Thesis is flawed, they still maintain that UNC is guilty as charged by said Thesis regardless of it's vaccuracy.

The reading specialist has admitted she "theoretically" violated Federally mandated Human Subject Research rules per our IRB but maintains she is 100% accurate in her findings. Anyone that has worked on human research knows that the Fed mandates of removing identifiers are very strict. She did NOT remove then after the IRB was assured that no human identifiers would be stripped before the study. She has not addressed the fact that a reporter she worked with on the stories somehow got copies of students transcripts without their permission but I'm sure they both will come clean on that as well...ahem.

The methodology of her paper, which BTW was posted online, has been examined by others in the field and roundly trashed as shoddy to say the least. She used a 25 question 10 minute word association, part of SATA FWIW, to test a carefully selected group of athletes to "prove" they had below standard reading levels. However, the company that sells that test as part of a package has clearly stated is must be used as part of a series to be effective. She did not use the rest of the test series, period. She further used a "correction factor" of 3 when scoring the tests. The series says she should have used a factor of 6, not 3. She then extrapolated the results of her small cherry picked group to ALL SA's at UNC for a 9 year period.

The first reason to believe she was cooking the numbers was that she claimed she did the research for a Thesis from 2005 - 2012. The Thesis was turned in and completed in 2009. She also was asked by the University to let them look at the numbers she used for her claims and she refused, saying they already had the raw data since they gave it to her. Per the Provost looking into it, the confusion resulted because her data was nothing like what she had been given.

She also has made conflicting claims on an almost daily basis. For example, she said last week she was considering litigation against a Provost for suspending her research rights at UNC. Within 3 days she sent a letter to the student paper claiming the IRB did it's job and she had no complaints with her research rights being curtailed. So you be the judge,,,her rights were wrongfully curtailed or she approves of them being curtailed

It's a long story and yes UNC did NOT properly supervise a part of the College of Arts and Sciences called the AFAM Program. There were abuses as there are at many Universities of "crip classes"? Oh HELL yes. But as another example, when Business Week labeled classes as "fake" they included the number of classes taken by athletes under Independent Study situations. Sorry guys, but we all know that many schools have IS classes.

Was it the cluster that Mary Willingham and her backers, a group that wants to end all college athletics BTW, maintains it to be? Not by a long shot.

 

[Full_Rebar]

I don't think UNC is alone in the way it treated high-profile athletes, and I don't think the result of this story is to end college athletics. If anything it should continue to bring the NCAA and student-athlete hypocrisy into a greater light. Why are the schools and NCAA pretending that these students are not treated differently, or that athletics does indeed come before academics at this level? No coach is hired (or fired) because of their graduation record, so why should we pretend that we as fans care what a student enrolls in if they are helping our school win games, bring in $, etc?

Now should students take advantage of the scholarships and opportunities being afforded to them? Absolutely yes. However having worked in higher education, it's clear that athletes are often like their peers in that they attend college for a variety of reasons, and learning isn't always one of them.

 

[rrlbees]

The problem with Bloomberg is that while they have done enough "research" to admit that the evidence they use for their reporting is based on one reading specialist's Masters Thesis is flawed, they still maintain that UNC is guilty as charged by said Thesis regardless of it's vaccuracy. The reading specialist has admitted she "theoretically" violated Federally mandated Human Subject Research rules per our IRB but maintains she is 100% accurate in her findings. Anyone that has worked on human research knows that the Fed mandates of removing identifiers are very strict. She did NOT remove then after the IRB was assured that no human identifiers would be stripped before the study. She has not addressed the fact that a reporter she worked with on the stories somehow got copies of students transcripts without their permission but I'm sure they both will come clean on that as well...ahem. The methodology of her paper, which BTW was posted online, has been examined by others in the field and roundly trashed as shoddy to say the least. She used a 25 question 10 minute word association, part of SATA FWIW, to test a carefully selected group of athletes to "prove" they had below standard reading levels. However, the company that sells that test as part of a package has clearly stated is must be used as part of a series to be effective. She did not use the rest of the test series, period. She further used a "correction factor" of 3 when scoring the tests. The series says she should have used a factor of 6, not 3. She then extrapolated the results of her small cherry picked group to ALL SA's at UNC for a 9 year period. The first reason to believe she was cooking the numbers was that she claimed she did the research for a Thesis from 2005 - 2012. The Thesis was turned in and completed in 2009. She also was asked by the University to let them look at the numbers she used for her claims and she refused, saying they already had the raw data since they gave it to her. Per the Provost looking into it, the confusion resulted because her data was nothing like what she had been given. She also has made conflicting claims on an almost daily basis. For example, she said last week she was considering litigation against a Provost for suspending her research rights at UNC. Within 3 days she sent a letter to the student paper claiming the IRB did it's job and she had no complaints with her research rights being curtailed. So you be the judge,,,her rights were wrongfully curtailed or she approves of them being curtailed It's a long story and yes UNC did NOT properly supervise a part of the College of Arts and Sciences called the AFAM Program. There were abuses as there are at many Universities of "crip classes"? Oh HELL yes. But as another example, when Business Week labeled classes as "fake" they included the number of classes taken by athletes under Independent Study situations. Sorry guys, but we all know that many schools have IS classes. Was it the cluster that Mary Willingham and her backers, a group that wants to end all college athletics BTW, maintains it to be? Not by a long shot.

I don't believe much of what you have said. Many of your points have been brought up in other places and in other articles and have been refuted. They are all UNC talking points.

 

[sendithome]

If these kids can't read, how did they graduate from high school AND get a qualifying score on the SAT. These are kids recruited by everyone. I don't think UNC deprograms kids from reading.

P.S. In his day, Dean Smith would have taught these kids to read, spell, and do math. His kids were the model student athletes and he made sure of it.

 

[UNC Blue]

I don't believe much of what you have said. Many of your points have been brought up in other places and in other articles and have been refuted. They are all UNC talking points.

No, they have not been refuted. Damn, that sounds like a wuffie, UNC has a respected former governor and two external review agencies lying for them in the massive cover up.

 

[RenoHeel]

I don't believe much of what you have said. Many of your points have been brought up in other places and in other articles and have been refuted. They are all UNC talking points.

You may choose to read this or not. You may choose to accept the bloggers credibility or shrug it off. I will tell you that he was one of the first to write our new Chancellor when she took office and asked her to undertake a thorough look at the tutoring program and UNC athletics. He is a reading Specialist at UNC and very familiar with the Thesis and has been supportive of Willingham in the past as evidenced in his past blog entries. But he has serious issues with her conclusions and very specifically states those concerns.

http://coachingthemind.blogspot.com/2014/02/truth-and-literacy-at-unc.html

 

[RenoHeel]

If these kids can't read, how did they graduate from high school AND get a qualifying score on the SAT. These are kids recruited by everyone. I don't think UNC deprograms kids from reading.

P.S. In his day, Dean Smith would have taught these kids to read, spell, and do math. His kids were the model student athletes and he made sure of it.

Excellent point. Every one of the kids she claimed were functionally illiterate, a rate she put at 8%-10%, received qualifying scores on the NCAA benchmarks. IF they are illiterate at UNC, they would be just as illiterate at any other DI University.

 

[rrlbees]

You may choose to read this or not. You may choose to accept the bloggers credibility or shrug it off. I will tell you that he was one of the first to write our new Chancellor when she took office and asked her to undertake a thorough look at the tutoring program and UNC athletics. He is a reading Specialist at UNC and very familiar with the Thesis and has been supportive of Willingham in the past as evidenced in his past blog entries. But he has serious issues with her conclusions and very specifically states those concerns. http://coachingthemind.blogspot.com/2014/02/truth-and-literacy-at-unc.html

Did you read the conclusion?

I can't believe people are even arguing degree of literacy or whether the data was interpreted properly. Doesn't matter what the percentage is, how did any iterate athlete get in?

 

[Cheriehoop]

Did you read the conclusion?

I can't believe people are even arguing degree of literacy or whether the data was interpreted properly. Doesn't matter what the percentage is, how did any iterate athlete get in?

and stay in?

 

[RenoHeel]

Did you read the conclusion?

I can't believe people are even arguing degree of literacy or whether the data was interpreted properly. Doesn't matter what the percentage is, how did any iterate athlete get in?

Sorry but it appears your reply is either garbled or just nonsensical. Any "iterate" athlete? Do you mean literate or illiterate? As for the conclusion, you may have missed the

Did you read the conclusion?

I can't believe people are even arguing degree of literacy or whether the data was interpreted properly. Doesn't matter what the percentage is, how did any iterate athlete get in?

OK do me a slight favor and clarify what you typed...did you mean "iterate", "literate" or "illiterate" ?

You asked if I read the conclusion. yes I did, I find it odd that you apparently failed to note two of it's major points. Let me refresh your memory:

"In fact, I believe she has had good intentions the whole time. Nevertheless, I am arguing that her methodology and anecdotes are not sufficient to substantiate her claims, and her choosing to publicize those claims has been irresponsible."

(I would assume the average person would agree that he does not feel her methodology offers proof)

"Last, I am acknowledging that UNC has admitted athletes who were considerably academically underprepared, but being underprepared for UNC does not necessarily mean reading at an elementary level or being illiterate."

(Again he states there is no proof of her illiteracy claim.)

No one is arguing that some athletes UNC admitted met the "average qualifications" that most students are held to. There is only one school that plays D1I football that I know of who insists that all it's recruited athletes be admitted as "regular students" before grant-in-aids for sports are offered. If Syracuse has the same standard as Stanford you can count me as impressed. .

But he does point out that there is no proof that illiterate students were admitted at UNC based on Willingham's research. However you are still free to look up the results of a study that ex-Governor James Martin conducted of the academic/athletic scandal at UNC and you may be surprised that if contradicts much of what the media has stated as facts. And no James Martin never attended UNC.

 

[rrlbees]

Sorry but it appears your reply is either garbled or just nonsensical. Any "iterate" athlete? Do you mean literate or illiterate? As for the conclusion, you may have missed the


OK do me a slight favor and clarify what you typed...did you mean "iterate", "literate" or "illiterate" ?

You asked if I read the conclusion. yes I did, I find it odd that you apparently failed to note two of it's major points. Let me refresh your memory:

"In fact, I believe she has had good intentions the whole time. Nevertheless, I am arguing that her methodology and anecdotes are not sufficient to substantiate her claims, and her choosing to publicize those claims has been irresponsible."

(I would assume the average person would agree that he does not feel her methodology offers proof)

"Last, I am acknowledging that UNC has admitted athletes who were considerably academically underprepared, but being underprepared for UNC does not necessarily mean reading at an elementary level or being illiterate."

(Again he states there is no proof of her illiteracy claim.)

No one is arguing that some athletes UNC admitted met the "average qualifications" that most students are held to. There is only one school that plays D1I football that I know of who insists that all it's recruited athletes be admitted as "regular students" before grant-in-aids for sports are offered. If Syracuse has the same standard as Stanford you can count me as impressed. .

But he does point out that there is no proof that illiterate students were admitted at UNC based on Willingham's research. However you are still free to look up the results of a study that ex-Governor James Martin conducted of the academic/athletic scandal at UNC and you may be surprised that if contradicts much of what the media has stated as facts. And no James Martin never attended UNC.

Dude, I'm typing in a phone. Sometimes spell check or fat fingers type gets spelling wrong or the wrong word. Have you ever been on the internet? We use a mobile version here.

As to the conclusion, one example is right up front.

"In conclusion, I want to be clear about what I am and am not arguing. First, I am not arguing that UNC has never admitted athletes who read at elementary levels"

All your points you keep trying to make say nothing differently than the kid arguing with his teacher that the 30% he got on a test should be a 50%.

 

[Vociferous]

"In conclusion, I want to be clear about what I am and am not arguing. First, I am not arguing that UNC has never admitted athletes who read at elementary levels"

First, I created an account to post this. Sweet site.

It's because there almost certainly has been an athlete that reads at elementary levels as well as a 'normal' student who reads at elementary levels. If someone reaches that age while still reading like a child its almost certainly due to a learning disability like dyslexia. Disabilities that reading specialists like MW are paid to mitigate. If you want to look at legitimate facts, instead of hearsay, here's (http://www.wral.com/asset/news/loca...ntercollegiate_Athletics_Report_1012-2013.pdf) a report on SAT/ACT scores of Bball and Football players in NC public schools (page 4). UNC ranks at or near the top in both categories.

Mary Wellingham has an axe to grind. It's sad that her work has gotten this much press, especially considering how obviously flawed her methodology is.

 

[itsbotime]

Remember how the Bernie Fine accuser recanted his story? Well, imagine that after this happened, the media ignored his change of story and continued to publish articles about how Syracuse was Penn State 2.0, and that Jimmy B should be run out of town and his name stricken from the record books. Facts be damned. That is essentially what is happening here. Willingham's research has been thoroughly destroyed to the point where she doesn't even stand by her numbers anymore, but BW doesn't care. They have an agenda, can't let facts get in the way of pursuing it.

 

[RenoHeel]

Dude, I'm typing in a phone. Sometimes spell check or fat fingers type gets spelling wrong or the wrong word. Have you ever been on the internet? We use a mobile version here.

As to the conclusion, one example is right up front.

"In conclusion, I want to be clear about what I am and am not arguing. First, I am not arguing that UNC has never admitted athletes who read at elementary levels"

All your points you keep trying to make say nothing differently than the kid arguing with his teacher that the 30% he got on a test should be a 50%.

I never realized you were typing thru a phone. Personally I like my tin cans and string.

What I am arguing is that the claims from CNN, Bloomberg, etc are all based on one source. That source is a UNC reading specialist who produced a flawed Thesis that was given to a local newspaper reporter who took it as gospel and has been preaching it's sanctity for years. When questions as to the reports accuracy began to become public, based on a very public UNC Faculty Meeting where a Provost pointed out the inaccuracy of the "facts" as presented in said paper, the media that had base their stories began to say that the methodology was not important and that UNC had shamelessly attacked a whistleblower. That's a very polite way of saying "the facts be damned, we will NOT look like we published inaccuracies".

One passing note and I will not bother you guys again on this subject. If anyone wants a fascinating read, do some internet searches on the Drake Group who claim they want to reform college athletics. They have a webpage and list of recommendations which would ensure that revenue producing sports, aka football and basketball, would quickly disappear from the landscape. They are currently engaged in helping Northwestern players trying to unionize. IMFAO it's a nice way of trying to destabilize the landscape and
kill the NCAA.

(If you think it's Tin Foil Times look at the middle of their list of recommendations for scholarships based on the average scores of incoming students of each University. The NCAA Clearinghouse standards would no longer exist. Now look up the Cuse's average and imagine competing for athletes against West Virginia, Kansas State, etc. based on their admissions data. The two major revenue streams for ALL of intercollegiate athletics would die very quickly since UNC, the Cuse and others could be competing only for athletes with 1300 SAT and 4.00 GPAs.)

Sorry but I just visited their site again and found they had changed the proposal to requiring frosh to sit a year unless they met a mean deviation standard based on each Universities' admissions profiles.

And yes if you dig far enough you'll find they support UNC's very own Mary Willingham and Jay Smith. Damn that sounds almost NC Statish but the facts are what they are.

(And BTW rrl, I'll spot you ten pounds of finger chubby and beat you hands down so to speak. <w>

 

[jimsonjunction]

Remember how the Bernie Fine accuser recanted his story? Well, imagine that after this happened, the media ignored his change of story and continued to publish articles about how Syracuse was Penn State 2.0, and that Jimmy B should be run out of town and his name stricken from the record books. Facts be damned. That is essentially what is happening here. Willingham's research has been thoroughly destroyed to the point where she doesn't even stand by her numbers anymore, but BW doesn't care. They have an agenda, can't let facts get in the way of pursuing it.

With all due respect, that's a piss-poor comparison. In a way, I feel for UNC. I do believe that they created phantom classes and admitted athletes with very sub-par learning skills. I also believe that this goes on at a LOT of D1 programs. So I feel for you guys because they're making UNC the poster-child of academic fraud.

You say "imagine if the media continued to publish articles about how Syracuse was Penn State 2.0..." believe me, they tried. People's lives were ruined. I still don't know what to believe when it comes to Bernie, but I do know that the seige on Boeheim and the program was more baseless than the attacks on UNC, which pales in comparison. Maybe you're being smeared by BW in the same way we got smeared by ESPN, but covering up academic fraud and covering up child molestation are vastly different accusations. Like I said, I feel for UNC...but then I think of what happened to us, and it's hard for me to feel too bad.

 

[GoHoos]

http://mobile.businessweek.com/arti...scandal-unc-fails-its-athletes-whistle-blower

UNC is dirty cheating scum, and have been doing it forever, under the "Carolina Way"

 

[GoHoos]

I never realized you were typing thru a phone. Personally I like my tin cans and string.

What I am arguing is that the claims from CNN, Bloomberg, etc are all based on one source. That source is a UNC reading specialist who produced a flawed Thesis that was given to a local newspaper reporter who took it as gospel and has been preaching it's sanctity for years. When questions as to the reports accuracy began to become public, based on a very public UNC Faculty Meeting where a Provost pointed out the inaccuracy of the "facts" as presented in said paper, the media that had base their stories began to say that the methodology was not important and that UNC had shamelessly attacked a whistleblower. That's a very polite way of saying "the facts be damned, we will NOT look like we published inaccuracies".

One passing note and I will not bother you guys again on this subject. If anyone wants a fascinating read, do some internet searches on the Drake Group who claim they want to reform college athletics. They have a webpage and list of recommendations which would ensure that revenue producing sports, aka football and basketball, would quickly disappear from the landscape. They are currently engaged in helping Northwestern players trying to unionize. IMFAO it's a nice way of trying to destabilize the landscape and
kill the NCAA.

If you think it's Tin Foil Times look at the middle of their list of recommendations for scholarships based on the average scores of incoming students of each University. The NCAA Clearinghouse standards would no longer exist. Now look up the Cuse's average and imagine competing for athletes against West Virginia, Kansas State, etc. based on their admissions data. The two major revenue streams for ALL of intercollegiate athletics would die very quickly since UNC, the Cuse and others could be competing only for athletes with 1300 SAT and 4.00 GPAs.

And yes if you dig far enough you'll find they support UNC's very own Mary Willingham and Jay Smith. Damn that sounds almost NC Statish but the facts are what they are.

(And BTW rrl, I'll spot you ten pounds of finger chubby and beat you hands down so to speak. <w>

What incentive did the reading specialist have for coming out and making up "false information?" Doesn't make since, you're dirty, deal with it.

 

[Cuseman78]

Remember how the Bernie Fine accuser recanted his story? Well, imagine that after this happened, the media ignored his change of story and continued to publish articles about how Syracuse was Penn State 2.0, and that Jimmy B should be run out of town and his name stricken from the record books. Facts be damned. That is essentially what is happening here. Willingham's research has been thoroughly destroyed to the point where she doesn't even stand by her numbers anymore, but BW doesn't care. They have an agenda, can't let facts get in the way of pursuing it.

Granted, I admittedly haven't paid very close attention to the Carolina academic fraud story, but this is exactly the reason I take all of these media "witch hunts" with a grain of salt.

 

[itsbotime]

What incentive did the reading specialist have for coming out and making up "false information?" Doesn't make since, you're dirty, deal with it.

You'll have to read her thesis to find the answer to that. She has three primary motivations:

1. Her goal is to abolish sports at all D1 universities, per her thesis. S

2. She craves attention.

3. She has a book coming out, so $$$.

Put those three motivations together, and you have #Willingscam.

 

[Col. Bleep]

Bloomberg Radio (WBBR) running story and interview with writer during Bloomberg Businesweek radio show:

http://www.bloomberg.com/rad

 

[rrlbees]

You'll have to read her thesis to find the answer to that. She has three primary motivations: 1. Her goal is to abolish sports at all D1 universities, per her thesis. S 2. She craves attention. 3. She has a book coming out, so $$$. Put those three motivations together, and you have #Willingscam.

Good stuff. Remember a couple years ago when it came out that you had fraudulent courses? A lot of these same posts were made. Now your chancellor admits guilt.

Any idea why records were asked for and UNC only supplied records for certain years? What is there to hide the other years? Now you're being sued.

 

[Orangepace]

SU probably shouldn't be pointing fingers here... Fab Melo anyone?