[Pooker]

Originally Posted by Golfer

.

As I said, it isn't directed at anyone in this thread. Although, I have sat in on a course at the U of I, where the professor explained to us, as fact, all about inappropriate American intervention, including Pearl Harbor, etc, and drew the conclusion that 9/11 was in fact, our fault.

Wow .... I guess if you are going to indict the entire education system at a great university becasue of one guys opinion .... that tells me a lot right there.

We all know that if ONE of 'em are like that ... they all are.

[Golfer]

I'm not sure I indicted an entire education system?

Cited one example. Not a broad sweeping generalization such as this one for example:

"This posting logic is why people on the Right are considered brain dead"

Can't remember who posted this one, can you?

When can I be a HN Legend?

[TychoBrahe]

I think what Golfer is saying is that multiple people are dropping multiple balls at the U of I, partly because athletics isn't as profitable as it should be, limiting what can be done in areas like easing Norm into retirement, and transitioning to new coaches.

I think I follow that argument, but I don't quite buy it. I think a better analogy is the old 'Boys Club," where you have a bunch of insiders running things, and they don't really have to listen to the outsiders. KF kept Norm on past his time because he wanted to, and he could. KF keeps his asst coaches on board for the same reason, and no one can tell him if and when to fire any of them. I don't see athletic revenues playing a role here (unless Golfer can elaborate with specific examples, which I'm open to hearing). Many colleges struggle to make money from athletics, but my impression is that Iowa is better than most at doing that.

As for student-athletes, Iowa is constrained by the same basic eligibility rules as anyone else. The difference, I think, is that we will not bend the rules to the extent as other universities (read The Blind Side to see how Ole Miss did so to get Michael Oher eligible). Iowa also does not over-sign like SEC schools, nor dump players off scholly. I can't say for certain that the Big Ten has any more stringent 'hard' rules than the SEC, but I do believe the Big Ten tries a little harder to actually get their players some semblance of an education. Still, the academic life of a scholarship athlete is much different than that of a 'normal' student, for good or ill.

[jimmyjohnAZ]

Originally Posted by Golfer

I'm not sure I indicted an entire education system?

Cited one example. Not a broad sweeping generalization such as this one for example:

"This posting logic is why people on the Right are considered brain dead"

Can't remember who posted this one, can you?

When can I be a HN Legend?

You are making ridiculous statements...why would you not expect ridiculous responses?

I hope you never mke HN Legend status!

[Golfer]

"(unless Golfer can elaborate with specific examples, which I'm open to hearing)."

I can't, because they would never publicly admit things like these, so it would be me just saying it.

But I get these things, just as I got the KoK leaving, from folks that always seem to have solid information. FWIW.

[tm3308]

Originally Posted by kmurp

I thought that Iowa and the rest of the BigTen was different than the SEC as far as class requirements etc for athletes. If some of what I read here (above) is true, it seems to me that we are the same as the SEC; we just don't get as good of players. It does make one wonder why there isn't just a minor league for football.
Also, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I don't quite understand what "Golfer" is trying to say. I am not in any way close to what has been going on in Iowa City so maybe that's why I dont' understand what he's saying.
Lastly, my brother in law teaches at an SEC school and he says the same things about many of his rural students as some of the posters above have said.

Almost every school will push the envelope when it comes to football and basketball players. But they do it to varying degrees. You find more of the guys who can't even read in the SEC. It's not THAT bad in the Big Ten, or at least at Iowa. But they do get breaks/perks that other students don't, and many couldn't handle a genuine course load (though there are plenty who could, too).

[MoseSchrute]

Originally Posted by Golfer

.

As I said, it isn't directed at anyone in this thread. Although, I have sat in on a course at the U of I, where the professor explained to us, as fact, all about inappropriate American intervention, including Pearl Harbor, etc, and drew the conclusion that 9/11 was in fact, our fault.

I once sat in a HEALTH class and listened to the instructor proceed to bash on Reagan. I can't imagine what the U of I has devolved to now.

[MoseSchrute]

Originally Posted by olddude

This "rural" argument is just plain stupid. I know, I went to a very small rural school. Here is a quote from one of my old teachers.
"I ordered IQ tests for an average rural community – the results showed I had a room full of geniuses. I called the area agency and was told, "…many of the farmers in that area had a college background and many had married teachers who came to teach there. Therefore, the quality of reading material in the homes was varied and plentiful…."

Or

"Our high school scholastic standing was always among the highest in the state and in the country at the time, and looking back, was much better than that of most schools today."

Or

"Our class received a 99% ranking in both the state and the nation on ITED tests all four years of high school."

So dont give me that "rural" load of bs your selling. If you want to blame anyone blame the teachers and communities, but it applies across the board and is not dependent on the size. It does have to do with community involvement, parent involvement and getting good teachers.

I'm with you on this one, olddude. It's total BS.

[Foval21]

since i am a teacher i can tell you the #1 thing for student acheivement is the family involvement. school size doesnt mean anything. in fact a bad family situation in a school with great teachers can lead to worse results than the other way around. i went to a school of 400 students in the hs and the school was incredibly strong in all areas and the families were very involved in the school. rural or size isnt a major factor at all.