Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 06/16/2013 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    NUdiehard

    concerning Tai tweet.

    Some of you are reading too much into my post. To give you an example of my thinking, use Ricky Thenarse as an example. He came from an extremely difficult background. Gangs, drugs, killings, surrounded him his entire childhood. I believe his brother was shot and killed in his neighborhood. Thenarse barely qualified. But what if he hadn't qualified? What if he missed out on qualifying because he was a few points short on his ACT score? Where would he be now? No degree? On the streets? Dealing drugs? Dead? How is denying someone like him the opportunity to come to the university, live in a structured environment where he had to practice hard, study hard, and live a disciplined life for 4 to 5 years, a good thing? How does denying someone like that that opportunity make our society a better place? Or make our university more credible? The university should be applauded for helping him with his studies so that he could get an education and a degree. That is something to be celebrated, not scoffed at or frowned upon. I see no difference between Ricky Thenarse, who was given that opportunity, and another young man who happened to have 1 or 2 points less on his ACT. So why should that other young man be denied that same opportunity? Are there some "athletes" who would abuse the opportunity? Sure. But as I said above, once they get here, they must achieve both on the court/field and in the classroom. And they must act like respectable citizens. If not, then they should lose that opportunity. Plus, it is up to the coaches to find the ones who may not have the grades, but have the desire and commitment to succeed both on the court and in the classroom. Those types of kids deserve that chance.
  2. 3 points
    jimmykc

    concerning Tai tweet.

    As long as we continue to maintain the charade that the athletes who compete for our colleges and universities go to school primarily to study, then I suppose there should be some modest standards. In reality, these athletes are underpaid professionals who raise vast amounts of money to support the educational facilities symbolized by their respective uniforms. Basically the admission standard should be an ability to send text messages and the mental capacity to make a purchase at McDonalds. As far as I am concerned, they are at the university to amuse me with their athletic prowess. If, however, they do not avail themselves of the academic help afforded to them and demonstrate a respect for education after being exposed to it and then manage to flunk out, too bad for them. Setting standards which are too high for admission is just pandering to our own egos which are usually inflated by the degrees which we all have stored away or are gathering dust on some wall. But this digresses from the emphasis on Tai, who also must suffer from having New Zealandish as his primary language.
  3. 2 points
    tcp

    concerning Tai tweet.

    wow, it's pedagogy day in here! next thing you know, someone's whipping out Freire. NUDiehard came close. I can't count the things that are wrong with the way Americans educate. I'd need a thousand more hands. But above those things, I'm a stickler for fairness and it's not fair to fudge the rules for athletes *unless* you can fudge them for others similarly situated. UNL doesn't do that, so if this is an academic issue, I have to be in the hardass camp, which I'm usually not comfortable with. If Tai doesn't get in, he doesn't get in, and the world keeps turning. His and ours. He still has options, and his basketball career won't be significantly hindered by him not going to Div 1 ball. This is why I miss prop 8 so much. Yeah, it was a hedge to get unqualified students in, but the reality is that it proved much of NUDiehard's point: that students can learn to learn better in a college environment than being excluded from that environment. Honestly, we've had hell with foreign students for some time (through no fault of their own). Let's just build our program the right way if we're able to do it. Recruit straight up, qualified and talented student-athletes the best we can and let the chips fall from there. I've never not woken up the day after not winning a silly championship. Yeah, they're fun, but they're not the point of living.
  4. 2 points
    BirdsOnTheBat

    concerning Tai tweet.

    Not doubting you, but I've heard this so many times with football recruits and 99% of the time they end up making it. We'll see what happens, too early to say he for sure won't make it IMO And they should NOT budge on entrance requirement; not for any student, athlete or not.
  5. 1 point
    a0t0w0

    concerning Tai tweet.

    Agree completely. Just because seemingly "less qualified" students are accepted doesn't mean coursework needs to change. Grade inflation is a huge contributor to the "dumbing down" of our country and that's on the educators to not allow. Admission standards for many universities are at the point where, I personally, don't see why they exist. It doesn't take much to be accepted to UNL (not a diss on the school, just is what it is). Students get weeded out pretty quick. I was amazed as a freshman at UNL by how many people gave up after the fall semester. There's plenty of points to argue here and it's a topic that makes for good debate, but as diehard said, the kids who choose to put in the work deserve the chance.
  6. 1 point
    LK1

    concerning Tai tweet.

    I'm an educator, though a young one. I agree entirely with this post. Testing, in general, is a plague. UNL is a public university. What business do they have exuding private standards on entrances? Considering the graduation rate at UNL is a terrifying 32%, perhaps they need to look at something like work ethic and start taking people with unique skills rather than relying on test scores (i.e. incomes of parents).
  7. 1 point
    Dean Smith

    concerning Tai tweet.

    If you are an educator then you should know better than to talk about national rankings of test scores. The US is basically the only nation that mainstreames everyone into the same classrooms. Everyone else track into vocational & college track schools. So not surprisingly all of our students average scores ate lowing than other countries best students. Also countries like Singapore who have some of the highest math scores also have the fewest percentage of students that go into math centered careers because they all hate math. So as we move to more standardized testing, many Aisian countries are requiring fewer & less stringent math classes & greatly scaling back on the testing. SAT used to stand for scholastic aptitude test until it was proven that they are no indication whatsoever of anyone's scholastic aptitude. By court order SAT now stands for SAT. The only thing that and the ACT test measure is how well students take those particular tests. So I don't understand why we use those test that have been proven to messure nothing as such an important factor in determining college admittance & scholarships. By taking test prep classes students can get better at taking these paeticular tests and can considerably raise their scores. The most acurate indicator of how well a student will do on these two tests is their parent's income & that has lots if statistical evidence to support that. They should have no place in the entrance process.
  8. 1 point
    NUdiehard

    concerning Tai tweet.

    Not doubting you, but I've heard this so many times with football recruits and 99% of the time they end up making it. We'll see what happens, too early to say he for sure won't make it IMO And they should NOT budge on entrance requirement; not for any student, athlete or not. I have never understood this rule or this position. Frankly, I don't understand why they have these "academic" requirements in the first place. If a young man who has a particular skill or talent wants to come to college and get an education, why should they be denied simply b/c they don't meet some arbitrary and capricious standard set by a bunch of academics sitting on their soap box and looking down on others. I am not saying this is the case for Tai, but often times these athletes come from broken homes with single parents, no parents, parents who are drug addicts, alcoholics, prostitutes, or worse. They live in conditions most of these so-called academics couldn't imagine, with drug dealing on the corner, brothers and sisters getting beat up or possibly murdered, and attending schools that simply try to keep everyone safe and alive as opposed to creating a stimulating learning environment. Many have learning disabilities on top of that. Yet, the very few who manage to keep themselves on the straight and narrow enough to succeed in athletics (while most of their friends have already joined a gang, been kicked out of school, put on probation or in jail) are then denied the opportunity to possibly change their life forever, get and education and become a productive member of society. Why???? Can anyone give me a rationale basis for denying this opportunity? Of course, once they are here, they must meet all academic, social and legal standards. If they don't, then they should not be allowed to stay. But the great part about a place like NU is that they can get assistance, tutors, study halls, etc., to help them succeed. Why is this a bad thing? I don't get it. As for Tai, he certainly does not come from conditions like this. Appears he is from an upper middle class family. But we don't know what his circumstances are either. Maybe it is a cultural issue. Maybe he has a slight learning disability. Or maybe he made a few mistakes a few years ago and wasn't the most responsible kid when it came to hitting the books. So what? What does that have to do with today? If he now wants to get his life in order. commit to his education while pursuing his craft, what does that harm you or me? If he is denied, he may never go to college. Is this better for him in the long run? I was blessed to grow up in a good home, with a good and supportive family, attend good schools, have a home environment that was conducive to learning, and got good grades. Does this somehow make me more deserving to get a post high school education than someone else who manage to develop a craft, stay out of legal trouble, and graduate high school, but simply not have a certain GPA that I did manage to obtain? Gimme a break. Even those SATs and ACTs are biased tests. What if that kid came from an urban high school that lacked good teachers and sound teaching? Should I now sit on my high horse and judge those have come up in very different circumstances and say they should not have a second chance now that they want to come to college, get an education and possibly change their life forever?
  9. 1 point
    49r

    Nick Rogers 2015 PG

    Dimes, You know everybody's at Ideal Market munching on beef jerky this morning, right?
  10. -1 points
    BirdsOnTheBat

    concerning Tai tweet.

    Not doubting you, but I've heard this so many times with football recruits and 99% of the time they end up making it. We'll see what happens, too early to say he for sure won't make it IMO And they should NOT budge on entrance requirement; not for any student, athlete or not. I have never understood this rule or this position. Frankly, I don't understand why they have these "academic" requirements in the first place. If a young man who has a particular skill or talent wants to come to college and get an education, why should they be denied simply b/c they don't meet some arbitrary and capricious standard set by a bunch of academics sitting on their soap box and looking down on others. I am not saying this is the case for Tai, but often times these athletes come from broken homes with single parents, no parents, parents who are drug addicts, alcoholics, prostitutes, or worse. They live in conditions most of these so-called academics couldn't imagine, with drug dealing on the corner, brothers and sisters getting beat up or possibly murdered, and attending schools that simply try to keep everyone safe and alive as opposed to creating a stimulating learning environment. Many have learning disabilities on top of that. Yet, the very few who manage to keep themselves on the straight and narrow enough to succeed in athletics (while most of their friends have already joined a gang, been kicked out of school, put on probation or in jail) are then denied the opportunity to possibly change their life forever, get and education and become a productive member of society. Why???? Can anyone give me a rationale basis for denying this opportunity? Of course, once they are here, they must meet all academic, social and legal standards. If they don't, then they should not be allowed to stay. But the great part about a place like NU is that they can get assistance, tutors, study halls, etc., to help them succeed. Why is this a bad thing? I don't get it. As for Tai, he certainly does not come from conditions like this. Appears he is from an upper middle class family. But we don't know what his circumstances are either. Maybe it is a cultural issue. Maybe he has a slight learning disability. Or maybe he made a few mistakes a few years ago and wasn't the most responsible kid when it came to hitting the books. So what? What does that have to do with today? If he now wants to get his life in order. commit to his education while pursuing his craft, what does that harm you or me? If he is denied, he may never go to college. Is this better for him in the long run? I was blessed to grow up in a good home, with a good and supportive family, attend good schools, have a home environment that was conducive to learning, and got good grades. Does this somehow make me more deserving to get a post high school education than someone else who manage to develop a craft, stay out of legal trouble, and graduate high school, but simply not have a certain GPA that I did manage to obtain? Gimme a break. Even those SATs and ACTs are biased tests. What if that kid came from an urban high school that lacked good teachers and sound teaching? Should I now sit on my high horse and judge those have come up in very different circumstances and say they should not have a second chance now that they want to come to college, get an education and possibly change their life forever? Are you an educator? If so, you have no business being in that profession with that opinion. It's attitudes such as this, over the past 50 years, that has led to the dumbing down of our country; putting us not even in the top 5 countries in the world when it comes to the academic success of our youngsters. Just becasue someone is coming form another country, WE should not make academic accommodation we do not make for anyone else. (and yes, I am an educator; for 39+ years).
×