RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

UNC academic fraud
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
LadyLionsFan



Joined: 25 May 2015
Posts: 57



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/08/15 5:38 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
We'll see what they do. I expect a hand slap rather than the death penalty, although the death penalty is probably more deserved. SMU has never really recovered from their DP. I remember when I was a kid that SMU was a real football power. Now, not so much.


My post was intended to convey what should happen to UNC...in a fair and sane world. Not what will happen. I fully expect that the NCAA will give UNC the proverbial 'slap on the wrist." While what UNC officials did and again FOR AN 18 YEAR PERIOD is heinously wrong, but the real problem with college athletics in America is the NCAA itself...it is hands down the most inept, unfair and yes corrupt organization I know of.


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/08/15 7:58 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

LadyLionsFan wrote:
the NCAA itself...it is hands down the most inept, unfair and yes corrupt organization I know of.


FIFA is waiting on Line 1...the US Government is on Line 2...the NFL is on Line 3


TechDawgMc



Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Posts: 394
Location: Temple, TX


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/11/15 2:59 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

SACS has put UNC on one year probation. That's not the end of the world but it is a fairly substantial slap. UNC has to show they've fixed their problems. If they don't, the only step beyond this is revoking accreditation (which I don't really see happening).


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/11/15 3:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

TechDawgMc wrote:
SACS has put UNC on one year probation. That's not the end of the world but it is a fairly substantial slap. UNC has to show they've fixed their problems. If they don't, the only step beyond this is revoking accreditation (which I don't really see happening).


I just saw this in this article ( http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/13058773/academic-fraud-nets-north-carolina-tar-heels-1-year-probation-accreditation-agency-says) Amazing. I've found one of the 17 schools that lost accreditation last year, City College of San Francisco and here were the recommendations from the committee that needed to corrected:

From the article http://www.sfgate.com/education/article/City-College-of-SF-to-lose-accreditation-in-2014-4645783.php :

Quote:
Here is an abridged version of the 14 recommendations for City College of San Francisco from the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges in 2012. Although characterized as recommendations, they are required for accreditation.

1. Revise the college's mission statement.

2. Develop effective planning processes.

3. Assess the effectiveness of the institution.

4. Identify what students should learn in each course and assess the effectiveness of courses and programs.

5. Assess the effectiveness of student support services.

6. Evaluate all employees responsible for student progress.

7. Create a way to determine if there are enough qualified support staff and administrators.

8. Include the cost of running buildings in long-term financial planning.

9. Develop a plan for maintaining, upgrading and replacing equipment and securing information systems.

10. Use the mission statement to decide how to allocate resources; increase reserves to a prudent level.

11. Report financial information accurately and in a timely manner.

12. Provide leadership training for all employees and elected trustees.

13. Improve governance; eliminate barriers to decision-making.

14. Trustees should follow their own policies and bylaws.


Evidently creating fake classes and giving inflated grades among other things just gets probation while the above list leads to removal of accreditation. Basically, a slap on the wrist for academic fraud but heaven forbid you don't comply with the entirety of the list above.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11105



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/11/15 4:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The issue with CCSF was that these same problems had been noted for the last ten years or so, and were not dealt with. It was more that they continually ignored the accreditation group rather than did anything hugely wrong.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
TechDawgMc



Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Posts: 394
Location: Temple, TX


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/11/15 6:41 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Yeah, Clay's point gets at the way accreditation works. Usually schools have to have multiple years of problems to get it pulled. The consequences are huge (no federal money) so the agencies don't want to yank accreditation unless the problem is both serious and not getting fixed.


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7746
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/11/15 6:54 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

TechDawgMc wrote:
SACS has put UNC on one year probation. That's not the end of the world but it is a fairly substantial slap. UNC has to show they've fixed their problems. If they don't, the only step beyond this is revoking accreditation (which I don't really see happening).


Big whoopin' deal. This has been going on for HOW LONG? And will the NCAA do anything? Don't hold your breath, boys and girls......



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/11/15 7:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

But didn't they say that these fictitious classes, inflated grades, etc for UNC date back for several years? So what if they are just catching them.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11105



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/12/15 10:23 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
But didn't they say that these fictitious classes, inflated grades, etc for UNC date back for several years? So what if they are just catching them.


The process is predetermined, I'm pretty sure. The accreditation group has to present its findings, and then the institution has X number of years/months/whatever to fix what's wrong, the accreditors return and if the problems have been fixed, it's all good.

Most of the time, the institution handles the problems with internal maneuvering and nothing bad ever happens, but it is somewhat of a check on schools.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/12/15 12:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

TechDawgMc wrote:
Yeah, Clay's point gets at the way accreditation works. Usually schools have to have multiple years of problems to get it pulled. The consequences are huge (no federal money) so the agencies don't want to yank accreditation unless the problem is both serious and not getting fixed.


It actually goes well beyond research grants. Many state licensure laws, for example, require graduation from an accredited institution. It can affect admission to graduate and professional schools. It can affect transfers of credits.

Which is why it's not often done, and won't be done to UNC. They'll do whatever the accrediting bodies tell them they have to do, they'll do it well within the deadlines provided for compliance, and they'll be taken off probation.


TechDawgMc



Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Posts: 394
Location: Temple, TX


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/12/15 11:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
TechDawgMc wrote:
Yeah, Clay's point gets at the way accreditation works. Usually schools have to have multiple years of problems to get it pulled. The consequences are huge (no federal money) so the agencies don't want to yank accreditation unless the problem is both serious and not getting fixed.


It actually goes well beyond research grants. Many state licensure laws, for example, require graduation from an accredited institution. It can affect admission to graduate and professional schools. It can affect transfers of credits.

Which is why it's not often done, and won't be done to UNC. They'll do whatever the accrediting bodies tell them they have to do, they'll do it well within the deadlines provided for compliance, and they'll be taken off probation.


By "no federal money" I didn't mean research grants. I meant no financial aid. Imagine the impact to a large school if none of its students could get any kind of federal aid.

You're right, though, the consequences of losing accreditation are just too high for the bodies to do it over one incident (even one that lasted as long as this one).

The NCAA needs to slap UNC hard if it wants to keep any kind of sense of credibility. But SACS has really done about all it realistically can -- as long as they take the follow-up seriously.


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7746
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/13/15 8:40 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

TechDawgMc wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
TechDawgMc wrote:
Yeah, Clay's point gets at the way accreditation works. Usually schools have to have multiple years of problems to get it pulled. The consequences are huge (no federal money) so the agencies don't want to yank accreditation unless the problem is both serious and not getting fixed.


It actually goes well beyond research grants. Many state licensure laws, for example, require graduation from an accredited institution. It can affect admission to graduate and professional schools. It can affect transfers of credits.

Which is why it's not often done, and won't be done to UNC. They'll do whatever the accrediting bodies tell them they have to do, they'll do it well within the deadlines provided for compliance, and they'll be taken off probation.


By "no federal money" I didn't mean research grants. I meant no financial aid. Imagine the impact to a large school if none of its students could get any kind of federal aid.

You're right, though, the consequences of losing accreditation are just too high for the bodies to do it over one incident (even one that lasted as long as this one).

The NCAA needs to slap UNC hard if it wants to keep any kind of sense of credibility. But SACS has really done about all it realistically can -- as long as they take the follow-up seriously.


I just don't expect the NCAA to do much beyond a wrist slap. If it were some school other than UNC, yeah......especially if it were one of the midwest land-grant colleges. But certain schools seem to get off scot free every time. I think UNC is one. I hope I'm wrong.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
Davis4632



Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 861



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/13/15 10:37 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I assumed anything less than a post season ban is a slap on the wrist?


scfastpitch



Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 616



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/13/15 1:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

This situation makes me think of that great Tark the Shark quote about the NCAA and Duke . " The NCAA is so upset with Duke they're going to give Cleveland State another year on probation ."


Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 5221



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/13/15 1:36 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
TechDawgMc wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
TechDawgMc wrote:
Yeah, Clay's point gets at the way accreditation works. Usually schools have to have multiple years of problems to get it pulled. The consequences are huge (no federal money) so the agencies don't want to yank accreditation unless the problem is both serious and not getting fixed.


It actually goes well beyond research grants. Many state licensure laws, for example, require graduation from an accredited institution. It can affect admission to graduate and professional schools. It can affect transfers of credits.

Which is why it's not often done, and won't be done to UNC. They'll do whatever the accrediting bodies tell them they have to do, they'll do it well within the deadlines provided for compliance, and they'll be taken off probation.


By "no federal money" I didn't mean research grants. I meant no financial aid. Imagine the impact to a large school if none of its students could get any kind of federal aid.

You're right, though, the consequences of losing accreditation are just too high for the bodies to do it over one incident (even one that lasted as long as this one).

The NCAA needs to slap UNC hard if it wants to keep any kind of sense of credibility. But SACS has really done about all it realistically can -- as long as they take the follow-up seriously.


I just don't expect the NCAA to do much beyond a wrist slap. If it were some school other than UNC, yeah......especially if it were one of the midwest land-grant colleges. But certain schools seem to get off scot free every time. I think UNC is one. I hope I'm wrong.


I think the women's program is going to face major sanctions, but they will be sacrificed so the men's basketball and football teams can get through unscathed although I refuse to believe that UNC's administration was doing all this stuff for the women's team but not their two money makers especially when the caliber of student-athlete that is in their football program is much lower than their women's basketball team. UNC routinely relies on non qualifiers who have to attend prep school or juco ,which the women's team rarely does


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7746
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/13/15 3:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Durantula wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
TechDawgMc wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
TechDawgMc wrote:
Yeah, Clay's point gets at the way accreditation works. Usually schools have to have multiple years of problems to get it pulled. The consequences are huge (no federal money) so the agencies don't want to yank accreditation unless the problem is both serious and not getting fixed.


It actually goes well beyond research grants. Many state licensure laws, for example, require graduation from an accredited institution. It can affect admission to graduate and professional schools. It can affect transfers of credits.

Which is why it's not often done, and won't be done to UNC. They'll do whatever the accrediting bodies tell them they have to do, they'll do it well within the deadlines provided for compliance, and they'll be taken off probation.


By "no federal money" I didn't mean research grants. I meant no financial aid. Imagine the impact to a large school if none of its students could get any kind of federal aid.

You're right, though, the consequences of losing accreditation are just too high for the bodies to do it over one incident (even one that lasted as long as this one).

The NCAA needs to slap UNC hard if it wants to keep any kind of sense of credibility. But SACS has really done about all it realistically can -- as long as they take the follow-up seriously.


I just don't expect the NCAA to do much beyond a wrist slap. If it were some school other than UNC, yeah......especially if it were one of the midwest land-grant colleges. But certain schools seem to get off scot free every time. I think UNC is one. I hope I'm wrong.


I think the women's program is going to face major sanctions, but they will be sacrificed so the men's basketball and football teams can get through unscathed although I refuse to believe that UNC's administration was doing all this stuff for the women's team but not their two money makers especially when the caliber of student-athlete that is in their football program is much lower than their women's basketball team. UNC routinely relies on non qualifiers who have to attend prep school or juco ,which the women's team rarely does


And it's the men's team that was by far the bigger offenders, I'm quite sure. But they must be sacrosanct, because their great coach is some sort of saint. Yeah, right...... Evil or Very Mad



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
PRballer



Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 2535



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/19/15 9:02 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Interesting story for a number of reasons, with a side note being that:

http://www.heraldsun.com/news/showcase/x110774192/Former-UNC-star-Sampson-absolves-Hatchell-in-paper-scheme

"Sampson was UNCs all-time leading scorer with 2,143 points until Tracy Reid eclipsed her in 1998. Sampson said she dreamed of staying around the game as one of Hatchells assistant coaches and figured it would be a no-brainer based on what she contributed to UNC womens basketball. That never materialized, and Sampson said it has strained her relationship with Hatchell, but not to the point that she would accuse her former coach of wrongdoing that she didnt witness."


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/19/15 11:35 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:

And it's the men's team that was by far the bigger offenders, I'm quite sure.


You're "quite sure" based on what exactly?


PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 16346
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/19/15 11:45 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PRballer wrote:
Interesting story for a number of reasons, with a side note being that:

http://www.heraldsun.com/news/showcase/x110774192/Former-UNC-star-Sampson-absolves-Hatchell-in-paper-scheme

"Sampson was UNCs all-time leading scorer with 2,143 points until Tracy Reid eclipsed her in 1998. Sampson said she dreamed of staying around the game as one of Hatchells assistant coaches and figured it would be a no-brainer based on what she contributed to UNC womens basketball. That never materialized, and Sampson said it has strained her relationship with Hatchell, but not to the point that she would accuse her former coach of wrongdoing that she didnt witness."


Well, if one player who finished more than 20 years ago said it, it must be true.


CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18371
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/19/15 1:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:
PRballer wrote:
Interesting story for a number of reasons, with a side note being that:

http://www.heraldsun.com/news/showcase/x110774192/Former-UNC-star-Sampson-absolves-Hatchell-in-paper-scheme

"Sampson was UNCs all-time leading scorer with 2,143 points until Tracy Reid eclipsed her in 1998. Sampson said she dreamed of staying around the game as one of Hatchells assistant coaches and figured it would be a no-brainer based on what she contributed to UNC womens basketball. That never materialized, and Sampson said it has strained her relationship with Hatchell, but not to the point that she would accuse her former coach of wrongdoing that she didnt witness."


Well, if one player who finished more than 20 years ago said it, it must be true.


...especially since the bulk of the allegations from the NOA against UNC WCBB were from 2007 on.


PRballer



Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 2535



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/19/15 1:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Yep, all good points and interesting that reporters will talk to any former player who will go on record (vs. the "inner circle" that won't?). I honestly posted this more about Sampson not getting an opportunity to coach with Hatchell and the strain on the relationship thereafter...interesting given Hatchell's interest in the external perception of her program.


greatgator



Joined: 20 Dec 2012
Posts: 142



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/19/15 1:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:

Well, if one player who finished more than 20 years ago said it, it must be true.


And so eloquently too..

The coaches dont have nothing to do with the academics, Sampson said.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/19/15 5:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

greatgator wrote:
PUmatty wrote:

Well, if one player who finished more than 20 years ago said it, it must be true.


And so eloquently too..

The coaches dont have nothing to do with the academics, Sampson said.


Now THAT'S a ringing endorsement. Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin